"'      . 


V^4 


Columbia  Umberattpd^w. 
in  tfje  €itp  of  Jleto  gotfe       X  * 

g>tfjool  of  ©ental  anb  (J^ral  gmrgerp 


1 


l^^W^S 


A  TREATISE  ON 


DENTAL  JURISPRUDENCE, 


FOR 


DENTISTS  AND  LAWYERS, 

EMBRACING  THE  FOLLOWING  SUBJECTS: 

Dantal  Jurisprudence— Dental  Expert  Testimony— Identification 
by  Means  of  the  Teeth— Dental  Malpractices— Cocaine  Poi- 
soning—Fracture of  Maxilla  During  Extraction  of  Teeth 
—Injuries   and    Deaths    Due  to   Anaesthesia  —  The 
Jurisprudence  of  Dental  Patents,  etc.,  etc., 


BY 


WILLIAM  F.  REHFUSS,  D.D.S., 

Author  of  "Dental  Massage;"  Member  of  the  Odontological  Society,  of 

Pennsylvania ;  of  the  New  Jersey  State  Dental  Society  ; 

Dental  Protective  Ass'n  of  U.  S.  A.,  etc. 


PUBLISHED   BY 

THK  WILMINGTON  DENTAL  MFG.  CO., 
No.  1413  Filbert  Street, 

PHILADELPHIA. 
I892. 


•X- 


Kntered  according  to  Act  of  Congresc,  in  the  year  1892, 
By  The  Wilmington  Dental  Mfc.  Company, 

PHILADELPHIA,   PA., 

In  the   Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington. 


TO 


JAMES  TRUMAN,  D.D.S., 

(Professor  of    Dental  Pathology,  Therapeutics,  and  Materia   Medica,  in  the  Denial 
Department  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Dean  of  the  Faculty), 

Whose  Efforts  and  Merits  in  the  Advancement  of  Dentistry  are  Recognized 
and  Honored  by  His  Professional  Brethren, 

THIS  WORK  IS  INSCRIBED 


Token  of  Esteem  and  Admiration  for  Him  as  a  Teacher,  and  a  Tribute  of 
Enduring  Friendship 

OF  HIS  FORMER  PUPIL, 

—The  Author. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 
Columbia  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/treatiseondentalOOrehf 


ALEX.    DURBIN    LAUER, 

ATTORNEY- AT  I.AW, 

ROOM   701,    DREXEL  BUILDING, 

Philadelphia,  July  30th,  1891. 

Mi  Dear  Doctor: — I  have  examined  the  MSS.  of  your 
■'■Dental  Jurisprudence," and  find  the  general  legal  principles 
therein  enunciated  correct,  while  the  arguments  presented  in 
the  special  subjects  are  in  accordance  with  the  authorized 
legal  views.  I  can  state  that  there  are  many  facts  in  it  which 
can  not  fail  to  be  of  service  to  the  advocate  in  the  trial  of  a 
cause,  involving  any  part  of  the  ground  it  covers. 

In  the  absence  of  any  work  on  that  particular  subject, 
and  especially  from  its  intrinsic  merit,  your  book  is  bound 
to  become  a  reference  in  all  cases  of  that  kind. 

Yours,  very  truly, 

ALEX.  D.  LAUER. 
Dr.  W.  Y.  Re  h  fuss. 


PREFACE. 

The  purpose  of  this  volume  is  to  supply  to  the  dental 
and  legal  professions  a  comprehensive  treatise  or  text-book, 
covering  the  subject  of  dental  jurisprudence,  showing  the 
relations  the  dental  practitioner  sustains  to  the  law. 

It  is  true  that  the  general  principles  of  medical  juris- 
prudence apply  equally  as  well  to  the  dental  practitioner, 
but  there  are  certain  special  questions  which  arise  exclu- 
sively in  dental  practice,  undoubtedly  creating  a  field  for  a 
distinct  and  separate  jurisprudence  for  dentistry.  The  ob- 
jective point  is  to  produce  a  true  work  of  reference  for  tech- 
nical points  of  a  dento-legal  character,  enabling  those  who 
are  desirous  of  obtaining  information,  or  quoting  opinions  or 
decisions  relative  to  any  dento-legal  question,  to  do  so  with- 
out extensive  research. 

The  absence  of  such  a  work  has  frequently  been  com- 
mented upon,  and  in  consequence  thereof  I  have  devoted  my 
energies  toward  supplying  this  need  to  the  professions. 

Owing  to  the  wonderful  advancement  within  late  years 
of  the  dental  sciences,  embracing  the  discovery  of  many  new 
operations  and  methods  of  treatment,  increased  responsibili- 
ties are  accredited  to  the  dental  surgeon,  the  neglect  of 
which  might  involve  him  in  litigation,  and  the  knowledge 
thereof  may  at  some  period  in  his  professional  career  avoid 
a  calamity  of  a  serious  nature. 

For  this  reason,  a  knowledge  of  dental  jurisprudence 
would  be  of  infinite  value  to  the  young  graduate,  who  too 
frequently  enters  upon  his  professional  duties  utterly  igno- 
rant and  oblivious  of  the  legal  responsibilities  incident  to 
the  practice  of  his  profession.  An  error  of  judgment,  reck- 
l<  — ness,  a  careless  mistake,  or  unprofessional  conduct  may 
involve  him  in  unwonted  trouble  that  might  ruin  his  whole 

professional  career. 

VII 


VIII  PREFACE. 

In  dentistry,  as  in  medicine,  jurisprudence  must  event- 
ually become  an  important  subject  of  education,  not  alone  to 
explain  and  show  the  nature  of  the  different  legal  liabilities 
for  which  the  dentist  is  answerable,  or  the  legal  conse- 
quences of  dental  malpractices,  but  to  point  out  to  the  stu- 
dent, and  caution  him  against  the  dangers  referred  to  above, 
and  which  are  more  fully  elaborated  in  other  portions  of 
this  work. 

In  writing  a  book  on  jurisprudence,  it  is  important  to 
consider  the  decisions  of  the  courts  in  actual  cases,  and 
thereon  base  the  arguments  and  conclusions  on  the  subject; 
consequently,  the  work  now  presented  is  largely  composed  of 
references  to  and  extracts  from  such  decisions,  and  the  au- 
thor's own  private  thoughts  have  in  no  instance  been  given 
preference  to  these.  Where  no  precedent  has  been  estab- 
lished, the  conclusions  are  derived  from  analogous  cases. 

As  the  intention  is  to  make  this  treatise  comprehensive 
and  practical,  the  repetition  of  important  points  becomes  a 
necessity,  in  order  that  each  subject,  to  a  certain  extent,  is 
complete  in  itself,  rendering  it  unnecessary  for  the  reader  to 
constantly  refer  to  other  portions  of  the  book  for  explana- 
tions or  information  ;  and,  moreover,  this  is  a  particular  ad- 
vantage and  convenience  for  those  who  may  desire  to  consult 
and  study  certain  subjects,  without  being  obliged  to  peruse 
the  greater  portion  of  the  book.  In  preparing  this  volume 
it  has  been  my  aim  to  consult  the  works  of  the  standard  au- 
thors on  all  subjects,  as  well  as  the  current  literature. 

Such  knowledge,  becoming  as  it  does,  common  prop- 
erty, may  be  quoted  and  reproduced  by  all  who  may  so 
desire,  providing  the  courtesy  of  always  giving  the  author 
the  deserved  credit,  is  observed. 

Having  faithfully  complied  with  these  requirements, 
the  author  feels  that  he  is  under  no  further  obligations  for  Lis 
extensive  quotations  from  standard  works  on  jurisprudence 
and  other  sources  of  information,  than  to  acknowledge  his  in- 
debtedness to  such  authors  who  have  contributed  to  the 
completeness  of  the  subject ;  and  the  reader  will  perceive,  by 
the  numerous  references   to  their  names  in  the  following 


PREFACE.  IX 

pages,  that  those  especially  worthy  of  mention  are:  Daniel 
Nason,  Esq.  (whose  article  on  "  The  Legal  Status  of  Den- 
tists." read  before  the  Dental  Society  of  Xew  York,  is  com- 
mendable) ;  Judge  Chas.  G.  Garrison's  (M.  D.)  valuable 
article  on  Dental  Jurisprudence,  in  "  American  System  of 
Dentistry,"  Volume  III ;  the  treatises  of  Professors  Taylor 
and  Guy,  of  London  ;  Field's  Medico-Legal  Guide ;  "Whar- 
ton and  Stille's  works  on  Jurisprudence ;  Howson  on  U.  S. 
Patents ;  Williams  on  Physicians,  Druggists  and  Dentists ; 
"  Dental  Cosmos ;  "  "Items  of  Interest,"  etc.  In  addition, 
the  author  has  made  an  extensive  research  of  the  court 
reports  and  digests  of  the  cases  that  occurred  in  the  United 
States  and  England,  which  have  a  bearing  on  the  subject. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  particular  attention  has  been  ob- 
served in  preparing  those  subjects  which  are  of  most  impor- 
tance to  the  dentists — notably,  the  different  forms  of  dental 
malpractices,  injuries  and  deaths  from  anaesthesia,  the  legal 
rights  of  the  dental  practitioner,  and  the  jurisprudence  of 
patents  are  treated  exhaustively. 

My  thanks  are  also  due  to  Professors  James  Truman 
and  C.  X.  Peirce,  and  to  Alex.  Durbin  Laucr,  Esq.,  for  their 
kindness  in  reading  my  MSS.,  and  for  the  pleasure  and  encour- 
agement derived  from  their  favorable  opinions  on  the  work 
and  their  commendation  of  it;  to  Dr.  E.  C.  Kirk  (editor  of 
"  Dental  Cosmos")  and  W.  Potter,  for  their  many  courtesies. 

In  conclusion,  in  submitting  this  treatise  to  the  criti- 
cism of  my  professional  brethren  and  of  the  legal  profession, 
it  is  with  the  hope  that  they  will  be  lenient,  and  deem  it,  to 
a  certain  extent,  worthy  to  meet  the  desideratum  which  it  is 
intended  to  supply. 

William  F.  Rehfuss,  D.D.S. 

1224  Walnut  street,         ,  .,,  .,    ,  ,   .  .     ,, 
,    ,,.  .  _  '  '  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

utb  Broad  i-ireet,  / 


CONTENTS. 

NUMBERS   RKEER   TO   THE   SECTIONS. 

"i  1.  Dental  Jurisprudence. — Definition. 

\  '1.  Requirements  of  Dental  Jurists. 

',.  3.  Dental  Witnesses. 

\  4.  Subpoena. 

'"/.  5.  Dental  Expert  Witnesses. 

'i  6.  The  Qualifications  Required  of  Experts. 

2  7.  The  Distinction  Between  an  Expert  and  Common  Witness. 
\  8.  The  Fields  of  Dental  Expertism. 

\    9.     Identification  by  Means  of  the  Teeth. 

1  10.     The  Legal  Protection  Afforded  the  Dentist  by  the  Degree  of  D.D.S. — 

The  Limitations  of  the  Practice  of  Dentistry. — The  Legal  Right  of 
the  Dentist  to  Administer  Remedies  Systeinically. 

|  11.     Malpractice. — What  Constitutes  Dental  Malpractice. 

\  12.     The  Various  Kinds  of  Dental  Malpractice. 

'i  13.     The  Dentist  as  a  Defendant. — Criminal  and  Civil  Prosecutions. 

\  14.     The  Degree  of  Skill  Required — "Ordinary  Skill." 

'i  15.     Not  Bound  to  Use  the  Highest  Degree  of  Skill. 

§  16.     A  Dentist  Cannot  Experiment  with  his  Patients. 

\  17.     The  Question  of  Abilities  Decided  by  the  Jury. 

\  18.  The  Standard  of  Skill  Varies  According  to  the  Circumstances  and  Lo- 
calities. 

'i  19.  Where  Life  is  Endangered,  a  Greater  Degree  of  Skill  is  Required  of 
the  Dentist. 

''/,  20.     Specialists  and  Non-Specialists. 

\  21.     Responsibilities  of  the  Dentist  for  an  Error  of  Judgment. 

3  22.     Negligence 

■?  23.     Contributory  Negligence. 

2  24.     Damages. 

\  25.     The  Fracture  of  the  .Jaws  (the  Alveolus  of  the  Superior  or  Inferior 

Maxilla  i  During  the  Extraction  of  Teeth. 
\  20.     Cocaine  Poisoning. 
'/  -1 .     Injuries  and  Deaths  due  to  Anesthesia. 

Hemorrhage  Following  the  Extraction  of  Teeth. 

Infection  of  Diseases  from  Unclean  Instruments. 

XI 


Nil  CONTENTS. 

{  SO.  Rape  Under  Anesthesia. 

(i  31.  (  ompulsory  Services. 

2  3'2.  Compensation — Contracts  for  Services  may  Ik-  Bx pressed  or  [mplied. 

§  33.  The  Legal  Rules  Regulating  the  Amount  of  the  Fees  Recoverable. 

>/.  34.  Liability  of  a   Third   Party  who   Requests  the  Services  of  a  Dentist  for 
the  Benefit  of  Another. 

35.  Claims  for  Services  for  Married  Women. 

#  36.  Liability  of  Minors  for  Services. 

\  37.  The  Book-Accounts  of  Dentists. 

\  38.  Partnerships — Contracts  Between  Preceptor  and  Pupil. 

\  39.  The  Legal  Relations  of  a  Dentist  and  his  Assistant. 

\  40.  Authority  and  Legality  of  State  Boards. 

£  41.  The  Constitutionality  of  Dental  Laws. — Liability  for  Practicing  without 

a  Diploma  or  License. 

2  42.  Patent  Rights. 

APPENDIX. 

History  of  Dental  Legislation. — The  Statutes  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Den- 
tistry in  the  United  States  and  in  other  Countries. 


DENTAL  JURISPRUDENCE. 


§  1.       DEFINITION. 

Dental  jurisprudence  maybe  defined  as  that  science  which 
teaches  the  application  of  every  branch  of  dentistry  to  the 
purposes  of  the  law  ;  hence  its  limits  on  the  one  hand  are  the 
requirements  of  the  law,  and  on  the  other  the  whole  range  of 
dental  knowledge :  anatomy, physiologj',  therapeutics,  materia 
medica,  chemistry,  operative  and  prosthetic  dentistry,  etc. 

To  enable  a  court  of  law  to  arrive  at  a  proper  conclusion 
or  decision  in  a  dental  case  at  issue,  as  necessity  arises,  each 
one  of  these  branches  of  science  may  be  an  aid  in  properly 
interpreting  the  evidence  adduced. 

§  2.       REQUIREMENTS    OF    DENTAL    JURISTS. 

The  field  of  dental  jurisprudence  is  necessarily  limited, 
but  a  dental  jurist  should  have  a  theoretical  and  thorough 
practical  knowledge  of  every  branch  of  his  profession,  and 
have  had  a  large  range  of  experience.  When  called  to  testify 
in  a  case  in  court,  he  should  be  able  to  interpret  any  difficult 
dento-legal  question  that  may  arise,  and  be  prepared  to  adapt 
his  knowledge  and  experience  to  the  proper  explanation  and 
interpretation  of  any  questions  or  facts  submitted  to  him,  to 
enable  the  jury  to  arrive  at  a  just  conclusion. 

The  more  perfect  a  man  has  made  himself  master  of  his 
profession,  the  better  will  he  be  qualified  to  follow  and  apply 
himself  to  the  practice  of  dental  jurisprudence.  For  he  can 
fxpect  no  consideration  from  the  lawyers  at  the  bar  if  he  at- 
tempts to  explain  that  of  which  he  has  but  a  vague  knowl- 
edge. 

Dr.  Ellwell,  a  member  of  the  legal  as  well  as  the  medical 
profession,  observes  that  "no  witness  is  ever  compelled  to 

9 


ID  DENT  \l.    .M  RI8PR1  DEKCE. 

appearand  testify  to  whal  he  doea  nol  know."  He  may  be 
compelled  to  attend  in  court  in  obedience  to  a  subpoena,  but 
if  he  attempts  to  testify  upon  subjects  requiring  opinions 
upon  which  he  has  no  well-settled  or  well-defined  ideas,  it  is 
his  own  fault,  and  he  alone  is  to  blame,  for  no  one  as  himself 
can  know  bo  well  a>  he,  until  he  has  exposed  himself,  how 
unfit  he  is  for  the  occasion.  However  anxious  a  witness 
may  be  to  appear  learned,  and  no  matter  how  hard  he  may 
labor  to  show  it.  he  will  find  it  difficult  to  make  the  court 
and  counsel  believe  that  he  is  really  so.  To  appear  really 
learned  he  musl  be  able  to  make  the  subject  upon  which  lie 
gives  an  opinion  clear,  and  to  give  satisfactory  reasons  for  his 
opinions.  It  is,  therefore,  necessary  that  he  clearly  and 
thoroughly  understands  the  subjeel  upon  which  he  gives  his 
opinions.     (Taylor's  Med.  Jurisp.,  p.  50.) 

§  3.      DENTAL   WITNESSES. 

A  dentist  may  be  required  to  appear  and  testify  in 
court,  or  before  judicial  or  other  officers,  to  facts  within  his 
observation,  as  an  ordinary  witness,  or  to  offer  expert  testi- 
mony either  orally  or  by  deposition,  in  the  same  manner  as 
a  non-professional  man,  if  served  with  a  subpoena  command- 
ing him  to  do  so.  In  the  former  case,  there  is  no  distinction 
between  the  dentist  and  other  witnesses,  and  the  same  legal 
rules,  regulating  the  production  of  all  testimony,  apply  to 
him  as  to  any  other  witness,  who  having  seen  or  known  some 
fart,  is  called  to  testify  thereto. 

§  4.      BUBPCBNA. 

A  dental  practitioner  is  bound  to  attend  court,  when 
served  with  a  subpoena.  Every  witness  must  obey  a  sub- 
poena when  with  it  his  reasonable  expenses,  etc.,  for  journey 
are  tendered  him.  In  civil  cases,  the  failure  to  pay  one  day's 
attendance  and  mileage  in  advance — the  fee  being  usually 
fixed  by  statute  and  is  different  in  the  various  states — would 
frequently  constitute  a  reasonable  excuse  for  non-attendance. 
In  criminal  cases  it  is  not  generally  necessary  to  tender  a  fee 
in  advance  to  compel  the  witnesses  to  attend,  it  being  their 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  11 

duty  to  obey  a  call  of  that  description,  it  being  also  a  case 
in  which  he  is,  in  some  measure,  a  party.  But  his  fees  will 
in  general  be  finally  paid  from  the  public  treasury.  The 
accused  in  all  such  cases  is  entitled  to  compel  witnesses  to 
attend  in  his  favor.     (Greenleaf's  Ev.,  ^  311.) 

An  expert  is  allowed  a  larger  fee  than  a  common  wit- 
ness only  as  a  matter  of  policy  or  arrangement  of  the  party 
litigant  subpoenaing  him.  In  no  case  can  the  excess  over 
the  usual  fee  ($1.50  for  each  day  or  fraction  of  a  day's  at- 
tendance at  court)  be  included  in  the  bill  of  costs  filed  by 
the  successful  party.  (Foster's  Est.  C.  P.  No.  1.,  Phila.  Co.  Ms.) 

A  question  of  much  importance  in  regard  to  the  attend- 
ance of  a  dental   witness    may   here   be    discussed.      If  a 

SUBPCENA  IS  SERVED  ON  AN  ORDINARY  OR  SKILLED  WITNESS,  IS 
HE    BOUND    TO    ATTEND? 

In  a  medical  case,  Betts  v.  Clifford  (Warwick  Lent 
Assizes,  1858),  the  late  Lord  Campbell  stated,  in  reply  to  a 
question,  that  a  scientific  witness  was  not  bound  to  attend 
upon  being  served  with  a  subpoena,  and  that  he  ought  not  to 
be  subpoenaed.  If  the  witness  knows  any  question  of  fact 
he  might  be  compelled  to  attend,  but  he  could  not  be  com- 
pelled to  attend  to  speak  of  matters  of  opinion. 

This  ruling  of  Lord  Campbell  would  necessarily  apply 
to  dentists,  who  belong  to  the  same  category  of  scientific 
men  as  the  medical  practitioner. 

In  Rich  v.  Pierpoint,  an  action  for  malpractice,  Dr.  Lee 
was  summoned  against  his  will  to  give  evidence  on  the  part 
of  the  plaintiff*.  On  the  evening  previous  to  the  trial,  a 
solicitor  called  on  him  with  a  subpoena.  Dr.  Lee  would  not 
listen  to  any  account  of  the  case  which  the  solicitor  proposed 
to  give,  and  stated  he  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  case. 

The  solicitor  warned  him  that  he  would  be  compelled  to 
pay  the  usual  penalty  if  he  did  not  attend.  He  went  to  court 
and  was  warned  not  to  leave  before  the  case  was  over.  He 
heard  the  evidence  on  the  part  of  the  plaintiff  and  the  medi- 
cal testimony,  and  on  this  gave  his  opinion — not  much  in 
favor  of  the  party  who  summoned  him,  and  not  against  him. 
Dr.  Lee  considered  that  he  could  not  avoid  attending  the 


12  DENI  \l-    -'I  RISPBUDENCE. 

trial  under  the  circumstances.  ("  Medical  Times  and  Gazette," 
April  12th,  1862,  p.  389;  Case  of  AVebb  v.  Page,  "Medical 
Times  and  ( Jazette,"  April  26th,  1862,  p.  432  ;  Taylor's  Juris- 
prudence, p.  38.) 

"Upon  affidavit  of  the  service  of  subpoena  and  the  pay- 
ment of  witness  fees  and  mileage  made  (in  the  Courts  of 
Pennsylvania),  within  an  hour  of  the  opening  of  the  session, 
a  recalcitrant  or  absent  witness  may  be  brought  in  by  at- 
tachment."    (A.  D.  Lauer.) 

When  the  subpoena  has  been  duly  served  and  the  fees 
paid  in  advance  when  demanded,  it' the  witness  is  entitled  to 
advanee  fees,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  person  thus  served  toobe}' 
the  command  of  writ — the  failure  to  do  so  without  a  reason- 
able excuse,  as  an  accident,  physical  infirmity,  death  in  the 
family,  etc.,  which  rendered  it  impossible,  would  be  a  con- 
tempt of  court  and  subject  the  offender  to  a  fine,  imprison- 
ment, or  both. 

5   5.       DENTAL    EXPERT    WITNESSES. 

As  an  expert,  a  dentist  may  be  classed  with  medical  and 
other  expert  witnesses.  The  difference  is  not  of  kind,  but 
simply  the  elass  of  facts  and  knowledge  presented. 

An  expert  witness  may  be  defined  as  one  who  has  gained 
peculiar  knowledge  and  experience,  by  practice  or  observa- 
tion, in  the  art,  science  or  business  in  which  he  is  called  to 
offer  his  testimony  or  opinions,  which  are  of  value  in  de- 
ciding the  case  at  issue. 

"Expert  Avitnesses  are  persons  professionally  conversant 
with  the  practice,  science,  skill,  or  trade  in  question."  (Best 
on  Ev.,  sec.  346  ;  Strickler  on  Ew,  408— Field's  Medico-Legnl 
Guide,  p.  5.) 

An  expert  witness  is  not  requested,  as  other  witne. . 

to  testify  because  he  witnessed  or  observed  a  fact  bearing  on 
the  case  at  issue  ;  but  he  is  summoned  to  interpret  and  ex- 
plain, for  the  benefit  of  the  court  and  jury,  the  meaning  and 
significance  of  the  facts  as  they  are  understood  bv  himself 
and  others  of  his  profession  or  art. 

On  the  subject  of  experts,  Greenleaf  observes:    "On 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  13 

questions  of  science,  skill,  or  trade,  or  others  of  a  like  kind, 
persons  of  skill,  sometimes  called  experts,  may  not  only  tes- 
tify to  facts,  but  are  permitted  to  give  their  opinions  in 
evidence."     (Greenleaf  on  Ev.,  sec.  440.) 

An  expert  witness  is  not  required  to  testify  positively, 
but  may  state  his  impressions  as  to  occurrences,  facts  or 
events,  from  his  knowledge  or  recollection  of  them,  and  he 
has  the  right  and  may  be  compelled  to  refresh  or  assist  his 
memory,  where  it  is  at  fault,  by  a  reference  to  a  written  in- 
strument, memorandum  or  other  document.  (1  Greenleaf  on 
Ev.,  sec.  440  ;  Blake  v.  People,  73  N".  Y.,  586  ;  Reed  v.  Board- 
man,  20  Pick.,  Mass.,  441 ;  Kan  v.  Stivers,  34  la.,  123  ;  3 
Field's  Law}-er's  Briefs,  Sub.  Evidence,  sec.  318.) 

In  a  note  by  Mr.  Smith  to  Carter  v.  Boehem,  supra,  he 
observes  :  "  On  the  one  hand  it  appears  to  be  admitted  that 
the  opinion  of  the  witnesses  possessing  peculiar  skill,  is  ad- 
missible whenever  the  subject  matter  of  the  inquiry  is  such 
that  inexperienced  persons  are  unlikely  to  prove  capable  of 
forming  a  correct  judgment  upon  it,  without  such  assistance  ; 
in  other  words,  when  it  so  far  partakes  of  the  nature  of  a 
science  as  to  require  a  previous  habit  or  study  in  order  to  the 
attainment  of  it ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  it  does  not  seem 
to  be  contended  that  the  opinions  of  witnesses  can  be  re- 
ceived when  the  inquiry  is  into  a  subject  matter,  the  nature 
of  which  is  not  such  as  to  require  any  particular  habit  or 
study  in  order  to  qualify  a  man  to  understand  it.  (See  Hardy 
v.  Merrill,  56  K  H.,  227  ;  Com.  v.  Sturtevant,  117  Mass.,  122 ; 
19  Am.  Rep.,  401 — Field's  Medico-Legal  Guide.) 

And  a  witness  cannot  generally  give  his  opinion  as  an 
expert  upon  matters  of  common  knowledge  and  not  requiring 
special  skill  or  experience.  (White  v.  Ballou,  8  Allen,  Mass., 
408  ;  New  England  Glass  Co.  v.  Lovell,  7  Cush,  Mass.,  321 ; 
Luce  >:.  Dorchester  Ins.  Co.,  105  Mass.,  299.) 

§  6.      THE   QUALIFICATIONS    REQUIRED   OF    EXPERTS. 

Before  a  witness  can  be  examined  as  an  expert  it  is 
necessary  to  prove  that  he  is  competent  and  possesses  the 
necessary   qualifications  to   render   him   legally  eapable  of 


14  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

giving  expert  testimony.  This  is  preliminarily  decided  by 
the  court  when  the  alleged  expert  is  put  upon  his  coir  dire,  but 
the  slightest  symptoms  of  technical  knowledge  will  carry  him 
past  the  court  into  the  tender  arms  of  the  advocates,  who 
are  only  waiting  to  pick  him  apart  before  the  jury. 

There  is  no  strict  test  for  the  settlement  of  this  question. 
In  order  to  determine  that  he  is  competent  to  act  as  an  ex- 
pert in  his  specialty,  the  court  will  inquire  what  special 
advantages  and  opportunities  he  has  and  has  had  for  acquir- 
ing the  necessary  familiarity,  how  long  he  has  followed  or 
pursued  it,  and  it  rests  with  the  court  to  ask  such  questions, 
to  prove  or  disprove  his  claims  of  competency  to  act  as  an 
expert  witness.  The  intention  of  the  court  is  merely  to 
find  out  whether  his  knowledge  of  the  art  or  science  of  the 
subject  under  consideration,  is  sufficient  to  give  him  the 
character  of  an  expert  therein.  Theoretical  experience  alone 
is  not  requisite,  nor  is  it  also  necessary  to  constitute  an  expert. 

In  examining  a  dentist  as  to  his  qualification  to  offer 
expert  testimony,  the  court  would  be  satisfied  if  it  were 
proven  that  he  had  received  an  education  in  dentistry,  and 
was,  or  had  been,  a  practitioner  thereof,  as  it  is  not  neces- 
sary for  an  expert  to  still  be  a  practitioner,  as  his  knowledge 
of  his  profession  does  not  cease  on  his  retirement  from 
practice. 

As  stated,  the  expert  is  summoned  to  interpret  to  the 
satisfaction  of  the  jury  the  accepted  scientific  or  technical 
thoughts  upon  such  questions  with  which  they  are  unfa- 
miliar. 

In  order  that  his  evidence  be  acceptable,  he  must  offer 
a  positive  fact,  otherwise  his  testimony  will  not  be  con- 
sidered. 

"  Thus  in  dentistry,  a  question  relating  to  the  profession 
is  to  be  considered.  The  jury,  who  usually  are  but  ordinarily 
educated  men,  are  not  supposed  to  be  versed  in  the  science 
of  dentistry ;  therefore  an  expert  is  called  into  the  case  to 
explain  to  the  court  and  jury  the  facts  under  consideration, 
lie  is  supposed  not  to  give  his  biased  opinion,  but  the  ac- 
cepted opinions  of  the  profession  at  large  on  the  subject. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  15 

There  is  a  diversity  of  opinion  on  the  subject  usually,  which 
renders  it  difficult  to  give  an  impartial  opinion  thereon. 
What  the  law  requires  is  the  fact  as  to  what  the  scientific 
thought  is  on  the  subject."  (Garrison's  American  Sys. 
Dentistry.) 

Books  are  not  to  be  admitted  in  evidence,  nor  are  their 
contents  to  be  admitted,  or  to  be  imputed  as  expert  testi- 
mony. 

A  professional  man,  if  called  to  testify  to  an  ordinary 
fact  within  his  knowledge,  cannot  refuse  to  attend.  Whether 
or  not  he  can  refuse  to  attend  as  an  expert,  is  an  undecided 
question  in  the  United  States.  In  England,  extra  compensa- 
tion is  given  one  for  expert  testimony.  In  the  United 
States,  two  views  are  maintained.  One  favoring  extra  com- 
pensation, and  laid  down  in  the  case  of  Buchanan  r.  The 
State,  59  Indiana,  p.  1 ;  in  the  case  of  Roelker  v.  Sprague, 
276,  in  the  IT.  S.  District  Court  of  Mass. ;  also  in  U.  S.  v. 
Howe,  in  the  U.  S.  District  Court  for  the  western  district  of 
Ark.  12,  Central  Law  Journal,  193. 

Another  class  of  cases  denies  the  right  of  extra  com- 
pensation. [Ex  parte  Dement,  53  Alabama,  389 ;  Summer 
r.  State,  5  Texas  Court  of  Appeals,  374. — Garrison's  Amer. 
System  of  Dentistry,  Yol.  III.) 

This  question  of  compensation  of  witnesses  needs  entire 
revision  and  appropriate  legislation  covering  the  whole  of 
expert  testimony.  Certain  states  have  already  passed  statutes 
upon  this  subject,  viz.  :  Iowa,  North  Carolina,  Rhode  Island 
and  Indiana.  In  the  first  three,  the  extra  compensation  is 
allowed,  while  in  the  latter  it  is  denied. 

In  this  unsettled  condition  it  would  be  unsafe  for  an  ex- 
pert witness  to  refuse  to  testify  without  compensation  in 
any  state  where  no  statute  covers  the  question,  as  the  power 
of  the  court  to  commit  for  contempt  is  practically  unlimited, 
and  not  to  be  legally  defined. 

7.    THE  DISTINCTION  BETWEEN  EXPERT  AND  COMMON  WITNESSES. 

The  line  between  expert  and  non-expert  witnesses,  is  not 

always    clearly   distinguishable.       A.-    ;i    general    rule,    HOD- 


16  DEXT  \l.    JURISPR1  DESCE. 

experts  are  confined  to  a  mere  statemenl  of  tacts.  (Com.  v, 
Wilson,  1  Gray,  Mass.,  387;  Caleb  v.  State,  39  Miss.,  722; 
Gehrke  >■.  State,  l".  Tex.,  568  ;  Clapp  v.  Fullerton,  34  X.  Y., 
100;  Real  v.  People,  42  N".  Y.,  270.)  And  they  cannot  give 
an  opinion  upon  a  hypothetical  statement  of  facts.  (State  v. 
Klinger,  40  Mo.,  228  ;  Fan-el  v.  Brennan,  32  Mo.,  328  ; 
Boardman  v.  Woodman,  47  N.  II.,  120;  Dunham's  Appeal, 
27  Conn.,  102;  Weema  v.  Weems,  10  Md.,  334;  Eckert  v. 
Flowry,  43  Pa.,  St.  49— Field's  Medico-Legal  Guide,  sec.  0.) 

The  opinions  of  professional  men  are  competent  evidence, 
and  in  many  eases  are  of  much  importance  and  justly  worthy 
of  consideration. 

But  it  is  the  decision  of  the  jury  which  is  to  govern, 
and  this  is  to  be  formed  upon  the  proof  of  the  facts  laid  be- 
fore them ;  but  certain  questions  He  beyond  the  knowledge 
and  experience  of  men  in  general,  but  within  the  scope  of 
those  whose  pursuits  constantly  bring  that  special  class  of  facta 
under  their  observation  and  consideration.  The  dental  prac- 
titioner alone  has  the  particular  means  of  acquiring  knowl- 
edge and  experience  in  whatever  relates  to  dentistry.  There- 
fore, when  a  question  arises  in  a  judicial  case  upon  the  sub- 
ject, and  certain  tacts  are  testified  to  by  other  witnesses,  a 
dentist  may  be  called  into  the  case  to  interpret  and  give  his 
opinions  as  to  the  character  of  such  facts. 

Such  opinions,  when  advanced  by  persons  of  consider- 
able experience,  in  whose  correctness  and  reliability  of  judg- 
ment just  confidence  can  be  had,  are  of  great  importance 
and  justly  deserving  of  the  respectful  consideration  of  the 
jury.  On  the  other  hand,  the  opinions  of  dental  surgeons 
having  but  little  experience,  or  undeveloped  or  visionary 
theories  to  support,  are  unworthy  of  consideration.  The 
value  of  such  testimony  will  depend  principally  upon  the 
fidelity,  experience  and  impartiality  of  the  witness.  When 
a  dentist  or  other  professional  witnesses  have  attended  the 
whole  trial,  and  heard  the  testimony  of  other  witnesses  as 
to  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case  at  issue,  they  are 
not  to  judge  of  the  credit  or  value  of  the  testimony  of  the 
witnesses  or  the  truth  of  the  facts  testified  to  bv  others.     It 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  17 

is  for  the  jury  to  decide  whether  such  facts  are  true  or  sat- 
isfactorily proven  or  verified  by  others. 

§  8.       THE    FIELD    FOR    DENTAL    EXPERTS. 

A  dentist  called  in  a  case  as  an  expert  may  be  required 
to  give  his  opinions  on  any  question  pertaining  to  dentistry. 
It  perhaps  is  one  relating  to  prosthetic  dentistry,  as  in  a 
civil  suit,  where  the  defendant  alleged  that  an  artificial 
denture  made  for  said  defendant  was  not  properly  adjusted 
to  fit  the  mouth,  and  therefore  was  an  unsuccessful  opera- 
tion, for  which  he  did  not  intend  to  pay.  The  expert  is 
called  in  to  testify  that,  in  his  opinion,  it  was  done  as  well  as 
could  be  required  of  a  dentist  possessing  ordinary  ability,  or 
his  opinion  may  be  the  reverse.  In  criminal  cases,  when 
the  defendant  is  charged  with  malpractice,  where  the  inju- 
ries are  alleged  to  be  due  to  the  improper  administration  of 
anaesthetics,  medicines  or  causing  the  fracture  of  the  max- 
illa ;  also,  identification  of  dead  or  living  persons  by  means 
of  the  teeth,  etc. ;  the  dental  expert  may  be  asked  to  give 
his  opinions  concerning  any  of  these  questions  ;  in  fine,  upon 
anything  that  may  be  construed  to  come  within  the  domains 
of  dentistry. 

He  may  be  subpoenaed  by  either  the  plaintiff  or  defen- 
dant in  the  case ;  and  in  no  wise  is  he  responsible  for  the 
consequences  of  his  opinions.  By  oath,  he  is  bound  to  tell 
all  and  suppress  nothing  of  what  he  conscientiously  be- 
lieves to  be  the  truth,  no  matter  what  may  be  the  result  to 
the  accused. 

§   9.       IDENTIFICATION    BY    MEANS    OF    THE    TEETH. 

This  is  one  of  the  most  important  subjects  for  the  careful 
consideration  of  dental  experts. 

All  modes  of  identification  have  their  disadvantages  and 
defects,  but  the  dental  tests  least  of  all.  Frequently  the 
absolute  identification  of  a  person,  whether  living  or  dead, 
is  a  difficult  matter. 

Cases  are  recorded  where  criminals  have  been  identified 
by  means  of  certain  peculiarities  of  their  teeth  after  all  other 


18  DENTAL    .11  aiSPRUDENCE. 

methods  of  positive  identification  have  failed.  Again,  per- 
Bone  accused  of  murder  and  other  crimes,  have  established 
their  innocence,  by  proving  that  their  own  physical  peculiari- 
ties and  characteristics  differed  from  the  published  descrip- 
tions of  the  supposed  criminal,  especially  in  cases  where 
peculiarities  of  the  teeth  were  considered  reliable  means  of 
identification  in  the  published  description  of  the  criminal. 
Notably,  the  celebrated  case  of  the  murder  of  the  Chicago 
millionaire,  Snell,  by  Tascott,  can  be  cited  as  an  illustra- 
tion thereof;  viz. :-— A  large  reward  was  ottered  for  the  arrest 
of  the  murderer.  Two  years  afterwards,  a  man  named  Suther- 
land was  arrested  in  Philadelphia,  under  the  belief  that  he 
was  Tascott,  the  murderer.  The  proofs  seemed  conclusive,, 
as  his  description  apparently  tallied  with  that  of  the  pub- 
lished account  of  Tascott  ;  but  his  innocence  was  primarily 
established,  because  it  was  proven  that  his  teeth  had  not 
certain  peculiarities  (gold  fillings  in  the  central  incisors)  as 
those  accredited  to  Tascott's.  Eventually,  on  the  production 
of  other  proofs  of  innocence,  he  was  acquitted  and  liberated. 

In  the  renowned  case  of  Dr.  Cronin,  the  Irish-American 
patriot,  who  was  murdered  in  Chicago,  although  the  body 
was  identified  and  recognized  by  a  number  of  witnesses,  still 
his  dentist  was  called  to  attend  at  the  inquest,  to  give  cor- 
roborative testimony  regarding  his  teeth.  JSTumerous  other 
cases  may  be  cited.  It  is  often  impossible  to  identify  a 
corpse,  even  if  no  part  of  the  body  is  missing,  and  in  cases 
where  mutilation  has  occurred  (as  usually  in  premeditated 
crimes,  accidents,  etc.),  the  difficulties  are  increased,  and  no 
test  is  more  valuable  than  that  afforded  by  dental  jurispru- 
dence. 

When  the  identity  of  a  corpse  is  suspected,  and  a  doubt 
exists,  especially  as  the  clothing,  hair,  hands,  ears,  etc., 
afford  no  positive  clue  or  proof,  the  dentist  of  the  person, 
whom  the  deceased  is  supposed  to  be,  is  summoned  to  exam- 
ine the  teeth  and  mouth  of  the  said  deceased  and  therefrom 
testify,  whether  or  not  the  peculiarities,  etc.,  of  the  teeth  are 
similar  to  those  of  his  former  patient,  and  thus  establish 
identity  or  non-identity.    He  has  available  many  and  diverse 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  19 

means  for  positive  identification  :  as  the  presence  or  absence 
of  teeth  ;  the  condition  of  the  alveolar  processes ;  the  presence 
of  dentures ;  fillings,  or  mechanical  dentures  and  contriv- 
ances ;  irregularities  in  the  arrangement  of  the  teeth ;  state 
of  decay,  and  many  other  peculiarities.  He  may  have  dia- 
grams, records,  models,  or  moulds  of  the  mouth  to  rely  upon, 
which  give  a  precise  means  of  identification,  such  as  no 
other  methods  offer.  In  the  identification  by  these  means, 
the  expert  cannot  be  too  cautious,  and  should  observe  the 
greatest  care  and  discretion  in  presenting  his  evidence  and 
in  establishing  his  claims  as  to  the  identity  or  non-identity 
of  the  person.  His  proofs  must  be  absolute  to  substantiate 
these  claims.  He  has  many  adverse  circumstances  to  com- 
bat, and  unless  he  has  examined  the  mouth  of  the  supposed 
person  but  a  short  time  previous  to  his  death,  it  may  be 
very  difficult  for  him  to  remember  the  exact  conditions  of 
the  teeth  and  mouth  at  that  time,  unless  anomalies  or  unus- 
ual conditions  exist.  Thus,  one  or  more  of  the  teeth  may 
have  been  extracted  in  the  mean  time,  and  of  course  there 
is  a  rearrangement  of  the  alveolar  processes  due  to  absorp- 
tion of  the  alveoli,  and  shrinking  of  the  gums,  presenting  an 
entirely  different  condition  than  at  the  previous  examination. 
Unless,  under  the  circumstances,  his  proofs  are  conclusive, 
they  are  to  be  received  merely  as  opinions  and  not  as  facts. 
The  following  cases  are  interesting,  as  practical  illustrations 
of  identification  by  means  of  the  teeth,  viz.  : 

Dr.  Guy  states  that  a  doubtful  case  of  identity  in 
Edinburgh  was  decided  by  a  dentist,  who  produced  a  cast 
of  the  gums,  which  he  had  taken  before  death. 

So,  also  the  remains  of  the  Marchioness  of  Salisbury, 
discovered  among  the  ruins  of  the  Hatfield  House,  were 
identified  by  the  jaw-bone  having  gold  appendages  for  arti- 
ficial teeth.     (Ghiy'fl  Forensic  Med.,  p.  23.) 

In  Mr.  Sargent's  late  history  of  Braddock'a  expedition 
(Philada.,  1850,  p.  227),  is  narrated  a  very  interesting  in- 
stance of  identification  by  means  of  an  artificial  tooth. 

Sir  Peter  Halket,  in  1758,  after  the  reduction  of  Fort 
DuQuesne,  proceeded  to  the  spot  of  Braddock'a  defeat  for  the 


20  DEN  1  'AL    .11  RISPR1  DENCE. 

purpose  of  discos  ering,  if  possible,  the  remains  of  his  father, 
who  was  there  killed.  "  In  reply  to  his  anxious  ques- 
tions,'3 we  are  told,  "one  of  his  tawny  guides  had  already 
told  Ilalkct  thai  he  recollected,  during  the  combat,  to  have 
Been  an  officer  fall  beneath  such  a  remarkable  tree  as  he 
should  have  no  difficulty  in  recognizing;  and  at  the  same 
momenl  another,  rushing  to  his  Ride,  was  instantly  shot 
down,  and  fell  across  his  comrade's  body.  As  they  drew 
near  the  Bpot,  the  detachment  was  halted,  and  the  Indians 
peered  about  through  the  trees  to  recall  their  memories  of 
the  scene.  With  sneaking  gesture,  they  briefly  discoursed 
in  their  own  tongue.  Suddenly,  and  with  a  shrill  cry,  the 
Indian  of  whom  we  have  spoken,  sprang  to  the  well-remem- 
bered tree.  While  the  troops  rested  on  their  arms  in  a  circle 
around,  he  and  his  companions  searched  among  the  thick, 
fallen  leaves.  In  a  moment,  two  gaunt  skeletons  were  ex- 
posed, lying  together,  the  one  upon  the  other,  as  they  had 
died.  The  hand  that  tore  away  their  scalps  had  not  dis- 
turbed their  position;  but  no  sign  remained  to  distinguish 
the  relics  from  the  hundred  others  that  strewed  the  ground. 
At  the  moment  Sir  Peter  remembered  him  of  a  peculiar  ar- 
tificial tooth  which  his  father  bore.  The  bones  were  then 
separated,  and  an  examination  of  those  which  lay  under- 
most at  once  solved  all  doubts. 

"'It  is  my  lather'.'  exclaimed  the  unhappy  youth,  as 
he  sunk  into  the  arms  of  his  scarce  less  affected  friends." 

A  most  singular  case  of  disputed  identity,  in  which 
there  was  between  two  persons  such  a  similarity  of  name, 
time,  place,  age,  occupation  and  circumstances,  as  for  a  long 
time  utterly  to  perplex  the  investigation,  occurred  in  Lon- 
don. The  body  of  a  woman  supposed  to  have  been  mur- 
dered, was  missing,  and  another  woman  was  arrested  upon 
suspicion  of  having  secretly  made  way  with  her,  and  sold 
her  remains  for  dissection.  Both  direct  and  circumstantial 
evidence  brought  the  crime  home  to  her.  The  day  after  the 
alleged  murder,  an  old  woman  of  the  description  of  the  sup- 
posed deceased  was  found,  with  a  fractured  thigh,  lying  ex- 
hausted  in   the  streets.     She    irave    her   name   as   Caroline 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  21 

Walsh,  and  said  that  she  was  from  Ireland.  She  died,  and 
was  buried  at  the  London  Hospital.  The  name  of  the  miss- 
ing woman  was  also  Caroline  Walsh,  and  she  was  also  Irish. 
The  prisoner,  Elizabeth  Ross,  insisted  that  this  was  the  fe- 
male whom  she  was  accused  of  having  murdered.  Various 
points  of  difference  were  established  by  a  large  number  of 
witnesses,  but  the  chief  distinction  was  that  while  it  was 
stated  that  the  missing  woman  had  very  perfect  incisor 
teeth  (a  remarkable  circumstance  for  her  age,  which  was 
eighty-four),  the  other  one,  who  died  at  the  hospital, 
had  no  front  teeth,  and  the  alveolar  cavities  corresponding  to 
them  had  been  obliterated  for  a  considerable  time.  More- 
over, the  non-identity  was  further  confirmed  by  the  grand- 
daughters of  the  missing  woman,  who  swore  that  the 
exhumed  body  of  Caroline  Walsh  was  not  that  of  their 
grandmother. 

There  is  great  danger  that  on  such  occasions  public 
opinion,  feeling  or  passion  may  warp  the  judgment,  and 
sometimes  even  pervert  the  facts. 

The  celebrated  case  of  the  body  of  Timothy  Monroe 
being  identified  as  that  of  William  Morgan,  the  murdered 
free-mason,  in  1827,  will  present  a  case  fully  in  point.  The 
proof  from  the  testimony  of  Mrs.  Morgan,  and  the  family 
physician  and  others,  seemed  to  leave  scarcely  amT  doubt  on 
the  subject.  The  bald  head,  grey  beard,  much  hair  on  the 
breast,  long  white  hairs  in  the  ears,  mark  of  innoculation  on 
the  left  arm,  the  teeth  double  all  around,two  of  them  being  ex- 
tracted on  the  same  side  of  the  face,  the  dentist  having  the  very 
teeth  which  fitted  exactly,  the  marks  of  a  surgical  operation 
upon  the  large  toe  of  the  left  foot,  all  seemed  to  be  proof  of 
a  character  that  could  leave  little  doubt  remaining,  notwith- 
standing that  the  clothes  found  on  the  body  were  different 
from  any  Morgan  had  ever  worn;  and  his  pockets  were 
found  to  be  full  of  tracts  published  by  the  British  Tract  So- 
ciety. The  verdict  was  that  the  body  was  that  of  William 
Morgan.  Soon  afterwards  a  Canadian  advertisement  for  the 
body  of  Timothy  Monroe,  caused  the  remains  to  be  disin- 
terred, when,  on  the  holding  of  a  second  inquest,  it  was  <lis- 


-2  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

covered  that  the  teeth  were  not  double  all  around  in  front, 
and  that  five  had  been  extracted  from  this  body,  whereas 

Morgan  had  lost  but  two.  The  jury,  fourteen  days  after  the 
inquest,  found  the  body  to  be  tiiat  of  Timothy  Monroe. 
(Dean's  Med.  Jurisp.,  p.  616.) 

The  case  of  Madame  Menetret,  the  retired  French  mil- 
liner, who  was  mysteriously  murdered  at  Yillemouble,  but 
whose  assassin  had  long  eluded  the  closest  search  of  the 
police,  has  just  evolved  a  new  feature,  which  is  surprisingly 
like  that  which,  a  generation  ago  at  Boston,  identified  Pro- 
fessor "Webster  as  the  slayer  of  Dr.  Parkman.  An  artificial 
tooth  has  been  found,  the  dentist  who  made  it  has  sworn 
that  he  fitted  it  to  the  mouth  of  Madame  Menetret,  and  the 
place  where  it  was  discovered,  and  attendant  circumstan*  <~ 
affix,  with  what  looks  terribly  like  certainty,  the  commission 
of  the  crime  upon  a  woman  named  Euphrasie  Mercier.  This 
it  will  be  remembered,  is  precisely  what  occurred  in  the 
Webster-Parkman  case,  and  the  counterpart  to  the  incident 
which  established  the  guilt  of  Webster,  and  who  was  hung 
for  the  crime. 

Perhaps  one  of  the  most  interesting  cases  in  the  annals 
of  criminal  jurisprudence,  is  the  Webster-Parkman  trial 
which  occurred  in  Massachusetts.  The  following  is  a  brief 
resume  of  the  case: — On  November  24th,  1849,  Dr.  George 
Parkman,  a  wealthy  and  well-known  resident,  disappeared. 
He  had  been  last  seen  at  the  medical  college  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity, in  the  company  of  the  professor  of  chemistry,  Dr. 
John  W.  Webster.  A  week  after  his  disappearance,  por- 
tions of  human  remains  were  found  in  a  vault  in  Dr.  Web- 
ster's laboratory  ;  other  parts  were  found  in  a  tea-chest,  while 
in  a  furnace  were  also  found  pieces  of  human  bones.  Among 
the  ashes  about  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  grains  of  gold 
were  discovered ;  also,  a  lower  tooth,  with  a  cavity  in  it, 
once  filled  by  a  dental  operation  ;  three  blocks  of  mineral 
teeth  with  rivets,  but  without  the  gold  plates,  and  a  great 
many  fragments  of  bone  belonging  to  the  skull  and  lower 
jaw.  The  bones  and  teeth  appeared  to  have  been  exposed  to 
intense  heat. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  23 

Under  ordinary  medical  experts,  identification  of  these 
mutilated  remains  with  that  degree  of  certainty  required  by 
the  criminal  laws  was  impractical.  One  Dr.  Keep  not  only 
identified  the  burned  and  mutilated  jaw  and  teeth  as  those 
of  Dr.  Parkman  in  a  manner  which  amounted  to  a  demon- 
stration, but  also,  from  the  melting  and  chemical  eftects 
produced,  was  enabled  to  say  what  had  been  the  means  em- 
ployed to  produce  the  partial  destruction.  The  remains  thus 
being  identified,  other  evidence  pointed  so  conclusively  to 
Prof.  Webster  as  the  murderer,  that  on  the  eleventh  day 
of  the  trial  a  verdict  of  guilty  was  reached  by  the  jury.  Dr. 
Webster  eventually  confessed  this  crime.  His  confession  in 
a  remarkable  degree  verified  the  particulars  given  by  the 
dental  expert.  This  case  is  cited  by  Dr.  Chas.  G.  Garrison, 
in  the  American  System  of  Dentistry,  but  a  full  report  of 
the  trial  can  be  found  in  Wharton's  Jurisprudence. 

i;">S-UDDERZOOK  CASE  (76  PA.  ST.). 

But  the  most  remarkable  case  in  dental  literature  is  the 
Goss-Udderzook  case,  which  occurred  in  Maryland  and 
Pennsylvania  early  in  1782.  The  particulars,  in  so  far  as 
they  are  necessary  to  a  comprehension  of  the  dental  phase 
of  the  case,  are  here  given  in  full : 

On  Feb.  3d,  1872,  a  Baltimore  newspaper  stated  that 
W.  S.  Goss,  residing  314  X.  Eutaw  street,  had  been  burned 
to  death  in  a  cottage  the  previous  night.  This  house  was 
several  miles  out  of  the  city,  and  the  fire  was  supposed  to 
Lave  been  caused  by  an  explosion  of  chemicals,  with  which 
Goss  was  experimenting  in  making  a  substitute  for  india- 
rubber.  The  house  was  entirely  consumed.  The  remains  of 
a  human  body  were  drawn  out  of  the  building,  the  lower 
limbs  destroyed  and  the  features  so  burned  or  charred  as  to 
be  beyond  recognition.  From  the  shape  of  the  chest,  neck 
and  head  the  corpse  was  identified  as  that  of  W.  S.  Goss. 
Indeed,  who  else  could  any  one  suspect  it  to  be?  So  the 
coroner  held  an  inquest  which  rendered  the  verdict  "that 
W.  8.  Goss  came  to  his  death  by  the  explosion  of  an  oil 
lamp." 


2  I  DENT  \L    .11  RISPR1  DEN<  I'. 

The  body  was  taken  to  Baltimore,  and,  after  solemn 
funeral  sen  ices,  removed  to  the  Baltimore  ( Jemetery.  While 
it  lav  al  Eutaw  street,  the  widow  had  noquestion  as  to  the  fact 
that  the  remains  were  those  of  her  husband.  She  knew  the 
contour  of  the  Deck,  head  and  breast.  Some  ten  or  more 
witnesses  testified  to  their  belief  in  the  same  identity,  regard- 
ing the  recognition  of  the  body  as  nor  difficult  or  doubtful. 

In  May,  1871,  W.  S.  Goss  had  seemed  to  be  seized  with 
;i  sudden  mania  for  insuring  his  life.  He  had  insurance  to 
the  amount  of  $25,000,  payable  to  Ins  wife.  Bis  last  policy 
was  dated  eight  days  prior  to  hi-  "  cremation."  The  stories 
of  William  E.  CTdderzook  and  A.  0.  Goss,  brother-in-law 
and  brother  of  W.  S.  Goss,  conveyed  the  impression  that 
"they  knew  too  much,"  and  led  the  insurance  companies  at 
once  to  inquire  into  the  facts.  While  all  disclosures  tended 
to  strengthen  the  suspicion  of  fraud,  there  was  absolutely 
nothing  in  the  way  of  direct  demonstration.  The  companies 
refusing  to  pay  the  claims  at  maturity,  suits  were  promptly 
instituted  under  each  policy. 

At  the  inquest  it  was  observed  that,  although  the  ex- 
tremities were  more  or  less  consumed,  the  head  was  entire, 
and  it  was  believed  the  bones  of  the  skull,  including  the 
teeth  were  uninjured.  Any  peculiarity  of  the  teeth,  whether 
natural  or  arising  from  mechanical  dentistry,  might  at  once 
determine  the  question  of  identity  of  these  remains.  An 
effort  was  made  to  obtain  a  description  of  any  peculiarity,  if 
it  existed,  for  the  purpose  indicated.  In  pursuance  of  this 
information  every  dentist  in  Baltimore  was  interrogated,  but 
with  only  negative  results.  So  far  as  could  be  ascertained, 
<  loss  ^";>s  known  to  have  unusually  good  teeth,  which  were 
conspicuous  in  his  ordinary  conversation  and  fully  exposed 
when  he  laughed.  From  no  source  could  it  be  learned  that 
he  had  had  occasion  to  employ  a  dentist. 

Mrs.  Goss  had  testified  before  the  coroner  to  certain 
facts  touching  the  'personnel  of  the  supposed  deceased.  She 
was  therefore  requested  to  make  a  more  elaborate  descrip- 
tion, especially  of  his  teeth,  and  to  grant  permission  for  the 
exhumation  and  examination  of  the  remains.     This  was  the 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  25 

proposition  in  regard  to  the  teeth:  Furnish  "description  of 
liis  teeth,  their  quality  and  appearance  ;  whether  wholly  or 
partially  sound  or  defective,  natural  or  artificial ;  whether  he 
had  any  peculiar  teeth,  had  lost  any,  and  how  many  and  what 
teeth ;  had  any  teeth  heen  broken,  and  how  many  and  what 
teeth,  and  how  broken  ;  had  any  teeth  been  filled  or  otherwise 
operated  upon  by  a  dentist,  and  how,  where  and  when  oper- 
ated upon,  and  by  what  dentist."  Her  reply  was:  "He 
wore  no  artificial  teeth,  to  my  knowledge,  never  complained 
of  pain  or  inconvenience  from  decayed  teeth,  and  I  do  not 
remember  his  requiring  the  services  of  a  dentist  during  the 
time  we  lived  together.  I  should  call  his  front  teeth  quite 
regular." 

The  remains  were  exhumed  and  examined  in  the  Balti- 
more College  of  Dental  Surgery  by  Professor  F.  T.  Miles, 
M.D. ;  R.  Wysong,  M.D. ;  Prof.  E.  Lloyd  Howard,  M.D. ; 
and  Prof.  F.  J.  S.  Gorgas,  M.D.,  D.D.S.  The  medical  ex- 
perts, who  examined  the  exhumed  body,  were  able  to  say 
little  that  could  throw  light  on  its  identity  with  W.  S.  Goss 
except  in  the  matter  of  teeth.  The  physicians  stated:  (1) 
The  remains  were  those  of  a  male ;  (2)  he  was  not  a  negro  ; 

(3)  he  was  between  the  ages  of  twenty-five  and  fifty  years ; 

(4)  he  was  of  fair  average  height,  of  stout  build,  and  of  great 
muscular  strength  ;  (5)  it  is  impossible  to  determine  whether 
the  burning  was  the  cause  of  death  or  was  post-mortem. 

But  Prof.  Gorgas,  the  dentist,  was  able  to  give  more 
valuable  opinions.  The  maxillary  bones  and  teeth  were  thus 
fully  described  by  him: 

■•  (  ondition  op  Maxillary  or  Jaw-Bones.  -Superior 
Maxillary — Perfect,  except  margin  of  alveolar  process.  In- 
ferior Maxillary — A  portion  of  the  external  surface  of  body 
of  the  bone  below  the  alveolar  process  and  to  the  right  of 
median  line,  including  the  right  mental  foramen,  destroyed 
for  a  space  of  two  and  a  half  inches  long  and  one  inch  broad 
or  w'kU;;  the  bone  otherwise  perfect. 

"  Number  of  teeth  remaining  in  upper  jaw,  two  ;  num- 
ber of  teeth  remaining  in  lower  jaw  (including  one  root  of 
tooth  |,  -even. 


26  DENTAL    .m  MSPR1  DENCE. 

"Condition  of  the  Two  Teeth  ix  Upper  Jaw. — Superior 
Eight  Second  Bicuspid — A  superficial  carious  cavity  on  pos- 
terior proximal  surface.  Cusps  on  grinding  surface  worn 
away  by  mechanical  abrasion,  bul  qo1  so  much  as  wholly  to 
obliterate  the  natural  depressions  on  this  surface".  Superior 
Bight  Third  Molar — Perfectly  Bound. 

"Condition  or  the  Seven  Teeth  ix  Lower  Jaw. — Root 
of  Inferior  Eight  Central  Incisor — The  crown  evidently  de- 
stroyed by  caries  to  a  point  below  free  margin  of  the  gum 
before  death.  Inferior  Right  Lateral  Incisor  -Perfectly 
sound.  Inferior  Right  Canine — Sound  :  angle  worn  away  by 
mechanical  abrasion.  Inferior  Left  Central  Incisor — Various 
cavities  on  both  proximal  surfaces,  which  communicated. 
Inferior  Left  Canine — Carious  cavity  on  the  anterior  proxi- 
mal surface.  Inferior  Left  Second  Bicuspid — Small  carious 
cavity  on  the  anterior  proximal  surface.  Inferior  Left  Third 
Molar — Large  carious  cavity  on  the  buccal  surface,  near  neck ; 
also  a  superficial  cavity  on  grinding  surface.  Grinding  sur- 
face worn  by  mechanical  abrasion,  so  as  almost  to  obliterate 
the  natural  depressions  on  the  surface. 

"  Form  of  Irregularity  of  Inferior  Front  Teeth. — 
Proximal  surfaces  of  the  inferior  right  lateral  incisor  and 
inferior  left  central  incisor  approach  near  together  at  the 
cutting  edges,  caused  by  the  loss  of  the  crown  of  the  right 
central  incisor,  the  root  of  this  latter  tooth  remaining  in  the 
alveolar  cavity." 

No  tokens  of  the  wearing  of  any  artificial  teeth  were 
discovered.  This  careful  and  critical  examination  could  not 
be  reconciled  with  the  statement  of  Mrs.  Goss  describing 
the  mouth  of  her  husband.  As  Mrs.  Goss  bad  been  married 
to  W.  S.  Goss  fourteen  years,  during  which  time  they  bad 
lived  together,  it  was  fair  to  presume  she  necessarily  would 
have  beard  complaints  of  pain  and  inconvenience  from  such 
badly  decayed  teeth  and  jaws;  that  she  w<mld  have  remem- 
bered the  required  services  of  the  dentist  who  had  extracted 
so  many  of  the  teeth:  and  that  she  would  not  have  called 
such  front  teeth  *L<|iiite  regular.'1 

The  trial  began  May  27th,  1873,  in  the  Circuit  Court  of 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  27 

the  United  States.  The  defense  was  conducted  by  counsel 
of  the  several  insurance  companies  interested,  all  of  whom 
were  members  of  the  Baltimore  bar.  The  descriptions  of 
"W.  S.  Goss  given  at  the  trial  were  so  singularly  consistent 
with  one  another  as  to  show  him  to  have  been  a  man  of  very 
marked  and  noticeable  form  of  face.  Especially  he  was  said 
to  have  had  unusually  large,  fine  teeth.  Upon  the  trial,  then, 
these  teeth  formed  the  defendants'  piece  de  resistance.  Their 
-witnesses  stated  that  they  had  often  noticed  them  when  Goss 
talked  or  smiled. 

The  companies  broke  down  in  the  attempt  to  prove  that 
W.  S.  Goss  had  been  alive  since  February  2nd,  1872.  Their 
counsel,  however,  came  up  manfully  to  the  more  difficult 
task  of  proving  affirmatively  that  the  corpse  was  that  of 
some  other  person  than  the  insured. 

Prof.  E.  Lloyd  Howard  testified  (in  regard  to  body  ex- 
humed) : 

"  Of  the  sixteen  teeth  belonging  to  the  upper  jaw,  nine 
had  been  lost  before  death ;  by  that  I  mean  some  time  before 
death.  There  remained  in  the  upper  jaw  two  teeth ;  there 
had  fallen  out  since  death  three  teeth  ;  and  two  sockets  which 
had  once  contained  teeth  were  shallow,  so  that  it  was  uncer- 
tain whether  these  teeth  had  been  lost  before  or  after  death. 
Xine  of  the  sixteen  teeth  were  certainly  lost  Ions;  before 
death,  and  two  others  possibly  were.  One  of  the  teeth  lost 
in  the  upper  jaw  was  a  front  tooth.  Of  the  teeth  belonging 
to  the  lower  jaw,  seven  were  lost  long  before  death.  One 
tooth  had  been  partially  destroyed  by  disease.  One  root  of 
a  tooth  and  eight  teeth  remained  in  the  jaw.  Of  the  seven 
teeth  lost,  six  were  back  teeth,  and  one  was  a  front  tooth, 
and  the  one  of  which  the  root  only  remained,  was  a  front 
tooth.  This  would  have  given  the  appearance  of  two  front 
teeth  lost  from  the  lower  jaw. 

••  Of  the  thirty-two  teeth,  sixteen  were  unquestionably 
lost  before  death,  and  of  the  sixteen  remaining,  one  was  only 
a  root  in  the  socket.  The  crowns  of  two  of  the  front  teeth 
approached  each  other  over  where  a  tooth  had  been  lost.  In 
the  upper  jaw  the   palatini'  canal,  which  perforates  the  roof 


28  DEKTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

of  the  mouth  just  behind  the  two  middle  front  teeth,  was 
greatly  enlarged  by  an  abscess  which  had  existed  previous 
to  death, and  which  abscess  communicated  with  the  diseased 
cavity  of  one  of  the  front  teeth.  The  abscess  appeared  to 
have  formed  about  the  root  of  the  tooth.  In  our  opinion, 
this  abscess, communicating  with  the  cavity  in  the  hone,  hail 
absorbed  or  eaten  through  the  bone  to  that  extent,  forming 
an  opening  between  the  socket  of  the  tooth  and  this  anterior 
palatine  canal.  It  must  have  been  considerably  diseased  to 
have  left  such  lesions  in  the  bone.  It  could  not  have  been 
otherwise  than  very  painful.  We  judged  from  the  facts 
pointed  out  that  the  other  teeth  over  the  diseased  root  must 
have  approached  each  other,  giving  a  crooked,  irregular  ap- 
pearance. (Plaster  model  of  mouth  handed  to  witness.)  I 
have  examined  the  model  before,  and  found  it  corresponded 
very  accurately  with  the  jaws  we  examined."' 

Prof.  F.  J.  S.  Gorgas,  who  united  in  the  report  of  the 
examination  of  the  remains,  and  had  prepared  plaster  casts 
of  the  mouth  which  were  used  by  witnesses  in  their  testi- 
mony relative  to  the  teeth,  was  unable  to  testify,  being  ab- 
sent on  account  of  the  illness  of  a  daughter  who  was  on  a 
visit  to  a  Western  city.  Dr.  Gorgas's  evidence  being  unat- 
tainable, Dr.  Robert  Arthur  was  called  for  the  defendants, 
and  testified : 

"I  have  practiced  the  profession  of  dentistry  for  thirty- 
two  years.  (Plaster  models  of  the  mouth  of  subject  handed 
to  witness.)  The  operations  of  nature  after  a  loss  of  teeth 
during  life  are  such  as  to  leave  it  a  matter  of  no  possible 
scientific  doubt  whether  teeth  have  been  lost  before  or  after 
death,  provided  they  have  been  lost  a  certain  time  before 
death.  Looking  at  this  model  of  the  lower  jaw,  speaking 
as  a  scientific  expert,  I  would  say  these  teeth  were  lost,  with 
the  exception  of  the  two  from  these  two  cavities  (referring 
to  the  two  where  the  teeth  had  fallen  out  since  death),  cer- 
tainly more  than  two  years  before  the  death  of  the  subject. 
In  this  model  of  the  upper  jaw,  three  of  the  teeth  I  should 
say  were  recently  lost.  The  tooth  next  to  the  front  tooth 
has  been  lost  unquestionably  from  one  to  two  years.     The 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  29 

absorption  seems  to  have  been  complete,  but  the  eye-tooth 
and  the  tooth  next  to  it  seem  not  to  have  been  lost  so  long ; 
the  absorption  has  not  been  completed.  I  should  infer  from 
the  small  cavities  that  the  front  tooth  had  been  lost  some 
time  before  death.  Obviously,  there  was  a  great  deal  of  dis- 
ease here;  there  must  have  been  much  physical  pain.  This 
place  where  the  penetration  appears  to  have  taken  place  i:i 
the  roof,  the  mouth  shows  a  perforation  through  the  bone 
communicating  with  the  socket  of  the  teeth.  The  teeth 
must  have  been  very  much  diseased  to  have  got  into  this 
condition.  Not  within  my  experience  have  so  many  teeth 
been  lost  without  the  patient  suffering  great  pain,  and  of 
necessity  requiring  the  services  of  a  dentist.  In  masticating 
ordinary  food  the  patient  must  have  found  great  difficulty. 
lie  must  have  eaten  with  great  discomfort.  I  would  not  by 
any  means  call  the  person's  front  teeth  '  quite  regular.' 
Teeth  that  are  absent  could  scarcely  be  called  regular.  Even 
the  teeth  of  the  lower  jaw  must  have  presented  a  very  irre- 
gular appearance." 

Dr.  Charles  H.  Ohr,  of  Cumberland  (plaster  casts  of  the 
mouth  of  the  exhumed  subject  handed  to  witness) :  "  It  was 
a  very  irregular  set.  In  my  judgment,  he  required  the  ser- 
vices of  a  dentist  on  more  occasions  than  one,  and  had  suf- 
fered a  great  deal  of  pain  on  account  of  diseased  teeth.  There 
is  very  little  surface  here  for  mastication  or  chewing  of  food. 
The  grinding  teeth  are  not  opposite  each  other  in  such  a  way 
as  to  enable  the  person  to  masticate  ordinary,  usual  food. 
The  abscess  at  the  roof  of  the  mouth  would  have  produced 
intense  pain." 

The  case  was  given  to  the  jury,  who  returned  a  verdict  in 
favor  of  Mrs.  Goss  for  full  -amount  of  insurance,  with  interest 
added.  Defendants'  counsel  gave  notice  of  motion  for  a  new 
trial. 

This  was  the  end  of  the  first  act.  Tragic  events  followed. 
The  verdict  was  rendered  June  6th,  1873.  Almost  directly 
after  this  (July  1st  or  2nd),  the  motion  still  pending,  news 
came  that  the  body  of  a  murdered  man  had  been  discovered 
in  Chester  county,  Pennsylvania.     The  story  was  that  Wil- 


30  DENT  \i.     ii  RISPR1  DBNCE. 

liain  E.  Udderzook  arrived  there  June  30th,  accompanied 
by  a  man  whom  CFdderzook  spoke  of  as  a  friend, but  did  not 
mention  any  name  A  jury  of  inquesl  found  "thai  the  same 
man  (name  unknown)  came  to  his  death  from  wounds  in- 
flicted by  a  dirk-knife  or  other  sharp  insl  rumenl  in  the  hands 
of  William  E.  CFdderzook,  of  Baltimore,  Maryland." 

The  fact  of  CFdderzook  having  been  principal  witness  of 
the  fire  on  the  York  Road,  coupled  with  the  fact  that  the 
remains  of  the  missing  stranger  bore  a  striking  resemblance 
to  the  description  of  Goss,  attracted  attention.  A  careful 
investigation  was  at  once  commenced.  All  the  measurements 
of  the  body,  muscular  development,  figure,  and  general  ap- 
pearance, corresponded  accurately  with  the  well-known 
description  of  Winficld  S.  Goss.  The  teeth  were  remarkably 
good,  regular,  even,  and  well  preserved.  The  remains  were 
fully  identified  by  Baltimore  citizens  who  knew  Goss  inti- 
mately during  his  lifetime. 

Udderzook  was  arrested  July  15th,  and  on  the  21st  of 
October  following  the  case  came  to  trial. 

The  indictment  contained  two  counts — one  charging  the 
prisoner  with  the  murder  of  W.  S.  Goss,  the  other  charging 
him  with  the  murder  of  a  person  unknown.  The  defendant's 
counsel  insisted  that  the  prosecution  should  decide  upon 
which  count  it  would  proceed.  The  district  attorney  boldly 
announced  his  resolution  to  elect  the  count  for  the  murder 
of  W.  S.  Goss.  The  State  thus  assumed  the  double  burden 
of  proving  not  only  the  murder,  but  also  the  identity  of  the 
murdered  man  with  one  who,  there  was  at  least  strong  evi- 
dence to  show,  had  died  a  year  and  a  half  before  the  alleged 
commission  of  the  crime.  The  charge  of  killing  W.  S.Goss, 
however,  opened  at  once  an  immense  field  of  testimony, 
otherwise  incomplete  and  altogether  meaningless,  in  which 
the  motive  became  abundantly  apparent.  Obviously,  by  the 
fearless  assumption  of  the  greater  burden  lay  also  the  greater 
— indeed,  the  only — assurance  of  success. 

The  State  made  out  an  elaborate  and  perfect  narrative, 
no  material  part  of  which  was  powerfully  assailed  by  the 
prisoner.     Udderzook  really  presented  nothing  worthy  to  he 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  31 

called  a  defense.  He  did  not  produce  A.  C.  "Wilson  {alias 
W.  S.  Goss)  or  any  trace  of  him  ;  he  did  not  explain  who 
AVilson  was,  or  what  was  the  origin  of  his  own  acquaintance 
or  the  nature  of  his  own  connection  with  that  mysterious 
person,  who  was  allowed  to  cross  the  scene,  coming  out  of 
mystery,  and  in  a  few  months  plunging  again  into  even 
more  profound  obscurity,  and  during  his  brief  sojourn  in  the 
known  world  proved  to  have  had  prior  acquaintance  with 
no  persons  save  Udderzook  and  A.  C.  Goss. 

Dr.  E.  W.  Bailey  testified :  "I  found  the  front  teeth, 
the  four  upper  incisors,  and  the  four  below,  had  been  driven 
back  into  the  mouth ;  two  of  them  were  lying  loose  on  the 
tongue  and  the  others  were  adhering.  I  removed  them  all 
from  the  mouth,  and  have  kept  them  in  my  possession.  The 
person  had  what  I  would  call  a  very  good  set  of  teeth ;  they 
were  firm  and  large,  and  appeared  healthy  and  strong." 

Dr.  E.  Lloyd  Howard :  "  The  upper  front  teeth  had 
been  driven  back  into  the  mouth,  carrying  with  them  a  part 
of  the  sockets  of  the  teeth.  I  found  ten  teeth  remaining  in 
the  upper  jaw,  and  open,  fresh  sockets  from  which  four 
others  had  been  removed  recently.  Two  upper  teeth  had 
been  lost  previous  to  death.  In  the  lower  jaw  I  found  nine 
teeth  remaining  in  position,  and  evidence  that  five  others 
had  been  lost  immediately  after  death  or  immediately  pre- 
ceding it.  There  were  evidences  of  two  lower-jaw  teeth 
having  been  lost  some  months  previous  to  death.  At  the 
time  of  death  he  must  have  had  twenty-eight  teeth  in  all 
remaining  in  his  mouth.  The  teeth  lost  previous  to  death, 
both  in  the  upper  and  lower  jaw,  were  back  teeth.  The 
general  appearance  and  character  of  his  teeth  were  perfectly 
good.  They  were  w7hite,  even,  and  regular.  There  were 
three  or  four  gold  fillings,  and  there  were  slight  marks  of 
disease  upon  two  teeth." 

The  evidence  completely  overwhelmed  Udderzook  on 
his  trial.     The  verdict  was  murder  in  the  first  degree. 

The  counsel  for  the  defendant  had  taken  a  great  many 
exceptions,  all  relating  to  facts  and  circumstances  bearing  on 
the  question  of  identity,  but  not  one  of  them  was  ultimately 


32  DENTAL    JUBISPRUDENCE. 

sustained  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania.  Their 
multitude  only  denotes  that  the  circumstances  were  numer- 
ous, and  in  this  multiplication  consists  the  strength  of  the 
proof. 

(For  other  cases  bearing  on  this  question,  the  reader  is 
directed  to  the  very  suggestive  and  original  paper  of  Dr. 
Richard  Grady,  read  before  the  Maryland  and  District  of 
Columbia  Dental  Association,  at  Baltimore,  October,  1883, 
and  reprinted  in  the  American  Journal  of  Dental  Science,  for 
January,  1884,  and  in  pamphlet  form.) 

Teeth  may  determine  age.  The  first,  second  and  third 
molars  are  cut  respectively  in  the  seventh,  fourteenth  and 
twenty-first  year. 

At  nine  years,  there  will  generally  be  12  permanent 
teeth,  viz.,  8  incisors  and  4  molars.  At  thirteen  years,  there 
will  be  20  teeth,  viz.,  8  incisors,  4  canines,  4  bicuspids  and  4 
molars.  In  examining  1,046  children  of  known  age,  Mr.  Saun- 
ders found  that  out  of  708  children,  of  nine  years  of  age,  -389 
had  the  full  development  of  teeth  for  their  age. 

But  on  the  principle  urged  by  him  that  where  the  teeth 
of  one  side  are  fully  developed,  those  of  the  other  side  should 
also  be  reckoned,  530  came  up  to  the  standard.  Of  the  re- 
mainder, none  would  have  varied  more  than  a  year  from  the 
standard,  and  these  always  by  deficiency.  Again,  of  338 
children  of  thirteen  years  of  age,  no  less  than  294  might, 
from  their  teeth,  have  been  pronounced  with  confidence  to  be 
of  age.  Of  the  remaining  44,  thirty-six  would  have  been 
judged  to  be  in  their  thirteenth  year,  and  eight,  at  or  about 
the  completion  of  their  twelfth  year.  (Tidy's  Leg.  Med., 
1883,  p.  210.)  The  wisdom  teeth,  it  was  said  by  Cockburn, 
C.  J.,  in  the  Tichbourne  case,  are  the  last  to  come  and  the 
first  to  go.  But  the  last  part  of  this  assertion  is  by  no 
means  universally  true,  and  the  teeth,  as  a  rule,  harden  with 
age.     (Wharton  &  Stille,  Med.  Juris.,  Vol.  3,  sec.  634.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  33 

§    10.     THE      LEGAL      PROTECTION     AFFORDED    THE    DENTIST     BY 

THE     DEGREE    OF    D.D.S. THE    LIMITATIONS     OF    THE 

PRACTICE  OF  DENTISTRY. THE  LEGAL  RIGHT 

OF     THE     DENTIST    TO    ADMINISTER 
REMEDIES  SYSTEMICALLY. 

In  considering  the  legal  protection  afforded  the  dentist 
by  the  degree  of  D.D.S. ,  the  two  important  subjects — "  the 
legal  right  of  the  dental  practitioner  to  perform  any  and  all 
operations  within  the  limitations  or  domain  of  dentistry," 
and  "  the  legal  right  to  administer  remedies  systemically," 
— that  have  provoked  much  discussion,  and,  seemingly,  are 
yet  undecided,  are  presented  for  conclusive  legal  interpreta- 
tion and  decision. 

In  discussing  these  questions,  it  is  of  first  importance  to 
describe  the  "  limitations  of  the  practice  of  dentistry,"  or, 
in  other  words,  what  may  properly  be  considered  as  included 
in  the  professional  duties  of  the  dentist?  Undoubtedly,  the 
care  of  the  teeth  when  sound,  the  treatment  of  their  deform- 
ities when  unsound  and  unhealthy,  and  the  adaptation  of 
substitutes  for  them  when  by  age,  accident  or  disease  they 
are  lost.  It  also  includes  the  extraction  and  filling  of  the  teeth , 
and  other  operations  upon  them,  their  alveolar  processes, 
and,  in  some  cases,  upon  the  adjacent  bones  ;  transplantation, 
replantation  and  implantation  of  the  teeth  ;  the  treatment  of 
the  diseases  of  the  teeth, gums,  antrum — surgically,  medicin- 
ally, or  by  both.  These  latter  operations  mark  the  limit 
which  separates  dentistry  and  oral  surgery.  He  must  be 
competent  to  perform  any  operation,  treat  any  disease  or 
pathological  condition  pertaining  to  the  dental  organs,  and 
adopt  and  practice  such  systemic  treatments  as  are  promulga- 
ted by  the  body  of  the  profession. 

A  prominent  dentist  erroneously  asserted  that  M.D.  is 
the  only  degree  that  can  protect  the  dentist,  even  in  serious 
results  following  surgical  operations.  The  law  will  not 
find  him  blameless  who  essays  operations  from  which  evil  re- 
sults follow,  without  this  degree.  This  statement  is  mere 
fallacy.     That  a  dentist  is  licensed  to  perform  any  and  all 


34  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

operations  within  the  domain  of  dental  surgery,  there  can  be- 
no  dispute,  providing,  of  course,  lie  complies  with  all  the 
laws  and  enactments  regulating  the  practice  of  dentistry  in 
the  country,  State  or  county  within  which  he  resides.  II<'  is 
expected  to  render  his  patient  the  best  services  and  treat- 
ment his  ability  will  allow.  The  law  expects  and  demands 
that  he  be  possessed  of  an  average  amount  of  skill  and 
knowledge  of  his  profession  ;  if  he  lacks  that,  or  neglects  to 
use  it  judicially  in  the  treatment  of  a  case,  or  in  a  surgical 
operation,  he  is  liable  for  malpractice,  if  serious  results  fol- 
low any  operation  he  may  perform. 

Like  other  scientific  professions,  dentistry  is  progress- 
ive ;  naturally,  its  field  of  operations  has  become  extended 
within  late  years,  and  operations  that,  in  former  years,  were 
not  allowable,  are  now  perfectly  legitimate.  So,  also,  with 
the  medical  profession.  Many  operations  are  performed, 
perfectly  legitimate,  that  formerly  would  not  have  been 
countenanced  by  the  law,  if  serious  results  had  followed,  and 
it  had  been  made  a  case  at  law.  However,  a  dentist  cannot 
experiment  with  his  patients  to  their  injury  without  liabil- 
ity  to  damages  for  the  same.  This  doctrine  was  decided  in 
the  cases  Potter  y.  Wiggins,  51,  Me.,  594,  and  Slater  v.  Bar- 
ker, 2  Wils.,  359,  and  is  quoted  elsewhere  in  this  work. 

But,  a  dentist,  in  performing  an  operation  or  treating  a 
case,  whatever  its  nature,  may  have  a  new  method  of  treat- 
ment or  operation  suggest  itself  to  him.  It  may  be  only  a 
deviation  from  or  improvement  of  the  old  method.  How- 
ever, if  he  has  good  reasons,  and  could  prove  that  it 
possessed  advantages  over  the  old  method,  he  is  privileged 
to  practice  the  same,  or,  when  such  operations  become  popu- 
lar and  accepted  by  the  body  of  the  profession  as  practical 
and  beneficial  to  mankind,  then,  and  then  only,  is  he,  ac- 
cording to  the  accepted  views  of  the  courts,  licensed  to  per- 
form them.  Naturally,  in  certain  operations,  the  circum- 
stances may  vary;  each  case  may  present  different  features, 
and,  of  course,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  every  one  will 
be  successful.  However, the  physician  or  dentist  will  not  be 
held  liable  for  adverse  results,  if  he  can  prove  that  he  pur- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  35 

sued  the  course  of  treatment  or  method  of  operating  advo- 
cated by  others  in  cases  of  the  same  nature,  and  used  an  or- 
dinary degree  of  skill  and  knowledge.  He  can  vary  the 
treatment  and  method  adopted  by  others,  if  he  can  give  suffi- 
cient good  reasons  for  doing  so,  and  prove  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  court  that  they  are  founded  on  good  judgment  and 
authority. 

As  stated,  day  by  day  new  operations  are  discovered, 
legitimized,  and  added  to  the  science  of  dentistry.  Those 
that  are  adopted  and  adjudged  by  the  body  of  the  profession 
necessary  for  the  benefit  and  advancement  of  the  health 
of  mankind,  the  dentist  is  expected  to  practice,  at  least 
that  is  what  the  community  and  his  patients  expect  of  him, 
viz.,  that  he  gives  the  best  services,  and  the  benefit  of  any  new 
discovery  in  science.  In  court,  the  expert  testimony,  the  law- 
yers and  jury  would  determine  if  such  knowledge  was  required 
of  one  who  possessed  an  average  degree  of  skill  and  knowledge 
of  his  profession,  where  negligence  and  want  of  this  skill 
and  knowledge  was  the  charge  against  the  dentist. 

Certain  dentists  question  their  legal  right  to  administer 
anaesthetics.  These  views  are  erroneous,  as  it  is  expected  of 
the  dentist,  that  where  in  an  operation  he  can  mitigate  or 
lessen  the  pain,  he  shall  do  so,  and  if  the  operation  demands 
it,  he  shall  administer  an  anaesthetic.  Referring  to  "Suits  for 
Injuries  from  Anaesthetics  "  (sec.  27),  we  find  that  the  skill 
demanded  of  him  is  held  to  include  all  the  known  rules  the 
experience  and  wisdom  of  the  profession  have  discovered 
and  advocated.  He  must  thoroughly  understand  all  of  the 
practical  details  of  the  operation,  which  the  court  would 
hold  to  constitute  only  ordinary  skill.  If  he  can  prove  that 
he  thoroughly  understands  the  modes  of  administration  of 
anaesthetics,  precautions  to  be  observed,  etc.,  he  is  not  liable 
for  adverse  results,  if  he  applied  his  knowledge  to  the  case 
at  issue. 

A  prominent  dentist  made  the  following  erroneous 
statement:  "If  a  dentist  should  administer  an  anaesthetic, 
and  the  patient  should  die,  what  is  the  result'.''  The  physi- 
cian can  give  a  death  certificate,  bui  thedentist  cannot."    This 


36  DENTAL    -II  RISPEUDENCE. 

is  absurd.  If  the  patient  dies  while  under  the  effects  of  an 
anaesthetic  during  an  operation,  the  physician  must  notify 
the  coroner  just  the  same  as  a  dentist  would  have  to  do,  and 
cannot  give  a  death  certificate  in  such  casts.  If  lie  cannot 
prove  that  he  used  the  requisite  skill,  as  stated  above,  lie 
would  be  held  liable  the  same  as  a  dentist  would  be  under 
-imilar  circumstances. 

Some  dentists  doubt  their  legal  right  to  treat  cases  by 
internal  medication.  This  belief  should  be  corrected,  as  it  all 
depends  upon  their  ability.  Dentists  must  prescribe  medi- 
cines in  certain  cases,  for  instance :  In  the  treatment  of 
carious  teeth,  or  any  pathological  conditions  of  the  dental 
organs  of  a  patient  in  an  anaemic  condition,  due  to  im- 
proper food  and  nourishment ;  where  is  the  well-educated 
dentist  wdio  does  not  recognize  the  fact  that  in  order  to 
ensure  success  in  his  operations  and  treatment,  he  must  pre- 
scribe tonics,  perhaps  a  change  of  diet,  and  treat  his  patient 
constitutionally,  producing  a  tonicite  on  the  general  system. 
In  the  South,  the  dentists  prescribe  quinine  for  the  cure  of 
malarial  neuralgia,  without  the  use  of  instruments.  In  tregi- 
minol  neuralgia,  in  most  cases,  relief  can  only  be  obtained  by 
constitutional  treatment,  also  in  the  severe  forms  of  alveolar 
abcesses,  internal  medication  is  absolutely  necessary. 

If  it  be  granted  that  the  dentist  is  licensed  to  treat  every 
disease  and  perform  all  operations  in  dentistry,  how  can  he 
be  successful,  if  at  the  very  outset  he  is  handicapped  by  his 
inability  to  prescribe  such  remedies  as  are  beneficial,  and 
which  the  case  indicates  and  requires?  If  it  be  admitted,  and 
it  cannot  be  otherwise,  that  we  are  licensed  to  treat  all  such 
cases,  where  can  the  responsibility  rest  if  adverse  results 
occur  in  cases  where  internal  treatments  have  been  used, 
providing  a  legitimate  course  of  treatment  was  pursued  in 
the  case  ? 

A  dentist  certainly  should  be  held  responsible  for  neglect 
if  he  does  not  use  internal  treatment  in  cases  that  positively 
require  it,  and  where  failure  can  be  attributed  to  this  negli- 
gence or  want  of  skill  and  knowledge.  Of  course,  it  is  not 
expected  that  he  prescribe  remedies,  unless  he  is  thoroughly 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  37 

conversant  with  their  effects,  and  the  proper  mode  of  ad- 
ministering them,  etc.  He  certainly  should  and  would  be 
mulcted  if  he  administered  remedies  without  such  thorough 
understanding  and  knowledge. 

§  11.      MALPRACTICE — WHAT    CONSTITUTES    DENTAL   MAL- 
PRACTICE ? 

Dental  malpractice  may  be  defined  as  bad  or  unskilled 
practice  in  a  dental  surgeon,  whereby  an  unskillful  operation 
is  performed,  the  health  of  the  patient  injured  or  his  life 
destroyed  by  the  improper  and  careless  administration  of 
medicines  or  anaesthetics. 

£  12.-      THE  VARIOUS  KINDS  OF  DENTAL  MALPRACTICE. 

The  various  kinds  of  malpractice  may  be  grouped  under 
three  heads  or  forms,  viz.,  willful,  negligent  and  ignorant. 

Willful  malpractice  occurs  when  a  dentist  performs  an 
operation  which  he  knows  and  expects  will  result  in  damage 
to  the  health,  injury  to  the  person,  or  the  death  of  the  in- 
dividual under  care  or  treatment. 

^Negligent  malpractice  comprehends  those  cases  where 
there  is  no  criminal"  intent,  but  gross  negligence  of  the  atten- 
tion which  the  case  requires:  as,  when  a  dentist  would 
endeavor  to  perform  an  operation  in  a  state  of  intoxication, 
from  which  an  injury  may  result  to  the  patient. 

Ignorant  malpractice  takes  place  when  a  dentist  performs 
operations  or  treatments,  which  would  result  in  harm  or  in- 
jury to  the  patient,  and  which  a  well  educated  dentist  would 
consider  improper  and  not  applicable  to  the  case  at  issue. 

§  13.       THE     DENTIST     AS    A    DEFENDANT — CRIMINAL     AND   CIVIL 
PROSECUTIONS. 

Cases  in  which  dental  malpractice  is  alleged,  may  give 
rise  to  the  criminal  prosecution  of  the  dentist,  or  civil  action 
for  malpractice. 

In  criminal  prosecutions  the  State  indicts  the  practitioner 
as  a  criminal  for  the  injury  to  health,  or  causing  the  death  of 
a  person  by  unlawful  means. 


38  DENTAL    .11  KISPRUDENCE. 

The  greatest  number  of  these  criminal  actions  tor  homi- 
cide arise  in  cases  where  death  has  resulted  from  the  admin- 
istration of  an  anaesthetic  agent,  particularly  chloroform. 

The  penal  statutes  of  various  states  provide  generally 
for  the  punishment  of  physicians,  surgeons,  dentists,  and 
others,  for  negligence  or  misconduct  in  their  professional 
employment  or  business,  which  causes  the  death  of  some 
person. 

In  Xew  York,  the  Penal  Code  provides,  as  follows  : 

"Sec.  195.  A  person  who  by  any  act,  or  negligence,  or 
misconduct  in  a  business  or  employment  in  which  he  is 
engaged,  or  by  any  unlawful,  negligent  or  reckless  act,  occa- 
sions the  death  of  a  human  being,  is  guilty  of  manslaughter 
in  the  second  degree. 

"  Sec.  202.  Manslaughter  in  the  second  degree  is  punish- 
able by  imprisonment  for  not  less  than  one  year  nor  more 
than  fifteen  years,  or  by  a  fine  of  not  more  than  one  thousand 
dollars,  or  both." 

Civil  suits  for  damages  against  dental  practitioners  are 
generally  brought  upon  the  claim  or  allegation  that  the  den- 
tist has  inflicted  some  injury  on  the  plaintiff  (his  patient) — 
as  that  he  fractured  the  jaw  in  the  extraction  of  a  tooth,  or 
inflicted  injury  in  some  operation,  or  destroyed  or  injured 
the  health  by  permitting  a  tooth  or  other  foreign  substance 
to  be  swallowed  by  the  patient,  or  by  the  administration  of 
the  anaesthetic,  and  the  plaintiff  asks  the  court  to  award  him 
adequate  pecuniary  damages  for  the  injury  he  has  suffered. 
In  these  cases  the  plaintiff  must  establish  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  court  that  he  suffered  an  actual  injury,  and  that  such 
injury  was  received  at  the  hands  of  the  defendant. 

To  prove  that  he  is  the  recipient  of  the  injury  complained 
of,  the  plaintiff  must  submit  conclusive  evidence  to  establish 
the  fact,  as  the  affidavit  or  testimony  of  a  reputable  phy- 
sician, surgeon,  dentist,  or  other  witness.  It  may  involve 
an  examination  of  the  plaintiff,  with  a  view  to  detect  whether 
the  claim  be  not  spurious.  \{'  the  facts  be  established  that 
the  plaintiff  is  injured,  and  the  defendant  is  responsible  for 
such  injury,  the  legal  questions  then  arise:     Was  the  injury 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  39 

accidental  ?  Could  it  have  been  avoided  by  the  use  of  other 
methods  of  operation  or  treatment  than  those  employed  by 
the  defendant  ?  Did  he  use  the  ordinary  skill  required  of 
him  by  law  ?  Or  was  he  guilty  of  negligence  in  any  degree? 
It  then  devolves  upon  the  plaintiff  to  establish  the  fact  that 
lie  in  no  way  contributed  toward  the  injury,  either  by  an 
action  or  negligence  on  his  part. 

In  all  prosecutions,  whether  a  civil  action  or  a  criminal 
one  for  malpractice,  the  degree  of  skill  the  defendant  used 
in  the  performance  of  the  operation,  or  the  treatment  of  the 
plaintiff,  and  whether  he  was  guilty  of  negligence  in  any 
degree,  or  the  plaintiff,  in  any  way  by  his  own  negligence, 
contributed  to  the  injury,  are  the  most  important  proposi- 
tions considered  to  enable  the  jury  to  arrive  at  a  just  conclu- 
sion. One  proposition  is  dependent  upon  the  other,  because 
if  a  dentist  lacks  ordinary  skill,  though  he  be  careful,  still 
lie  is  liable  for  malpractice ;  on  the  other  hand,  no  matter 
how  skilful  he  is,  if  he  is  negligent  he  is  also  liable. 

The  consideration  of  the  degree  of  skill  required  by  law 
of  a  dental  practitioner  in  his  professional  duties,  is  of  first 
importance. 

£   14.       THE  DEGREE  OF  SKILL  REQUIRED. 

In  the  performance  of  all  dental  operations,  the  dentist 
is  bound  and  required  to   use   at   least  ordinary  skill.     He 
must  adopt  the  means  and   apply  the   skill   and   treatments 
advocated  by  the  highest  and  best  authorities  in  his  profes- 
sion.    He  must  possess  and   practically  use  that   degree   of 
skill  and  amount  of  knowledge  and  science,  which  leading 
authorities  have  pronounced  as  the  result  of  their  researches 
and  experience  up  to  the  present  time  or  within  a  reasonable 
time  before  the  issue   or   question  to   be   decided    is   made. 
I  Ellwell  on  Malpractice,  55;  Amer.  Law.  Reg.  X.  S.,  774 
Bee  also  8  East  Eng.,  347;  1  II.  Bl.,Eng.,6l;   McCandless  v 
M< -W'lia.,  22  Pa.  St.,  261  ;  27  X.  II.,  460  ;  13  B.  Mon.,  219 
Shear  &  Redf.  on  Negligence,  sec.  440;  McLalon  v.  Adams 
19  Pick    Mass.,  333;  Carpenter  v.   Blake,   60   Barb.,   488 
Patten  v.  Wiggins,  51  Me.,  594  ;    Rex  v.  Long,  4  C.  and  P.) 


40  DENT  k.L    .11  RISPRUDENCE. 

The  genera]  rule  as  stated  is, as  follows:  -That  a  dentist 
who  performs  any  dental  operation  for  a  fee,  is  liable  for 
such  want  of  ordinary  skill  or  diligence  on  his  part  that 
would  result  in  injury  to  bis  patient  or  unstability  of  his 
operations.  It  is  not  sufficient,  to  render  him  liable,  to 
prove  that  the  defendant  used  a  less  degree  of  skill  than 
some  other  dentist  might  have  used,  nor  is  it  enough  that 
he  himself  acknowledges  some  degree  of  want  of  care  or  skill 
exercised  ;  there  must  have  been  an  absence  of  competent  or 
ordinary  skill  and  care  used,  and  to  such  a  degree  as  to  cause 
adverse  results.  The  law  does  not  countenance  empiricism, 
and  at  the  same  time  does  not  expect  a  dentist  to  possess  the 
most  thorough  dental  education  and  experience,  but  it  does 
require  that  an  uneducated  man  shall  not,  under  the  pretense 
of  being  a  well  qualified  dentist,  recklessly  perform  dental 
operations  or  treatments. 

Should  the  practitioner  inform  his  patient  of  his  want 
of  skill  or  knowledge,  or  the  patient  by  some  other  means 
learned  the  fact,  the  latter  cannot  complain  of  that  which  he 
knew  did  not  exist. 

Under  certain  circumstances,  a  dentist,  though  inexperi- 
enced and  unlearned,  may  undertake  an  operation,  and  in 
such  cases  he  is  expected  to  use  the  best  skill  and  judgment 
he  may  possess.  For  instance,  a  dentist  before  administering 
an  anaesthetic  must  learn  the  physical  condition  of  his  patient, 
whether  he  sutlers  from  heart,  lung,  or  any  other  organic 
diseases.  Or  he  should  have  a  physician  make  such  ex- 
amination, if  he  himself  is  incapable,  or  have  the  physician 
of  the  patient  certify  that  the  latter  is  in  tit  physical  condi- 
tion to  inhale  an  anaesthetic.  A  dentist  should  protect  him- 
self, because  an  accident  might  occur  during  or  after  anaes- 
thesia, caused  by  some  organic  trouble,  and  a  jury  might 
mulct  a  dentist  if  it  could  be  proven  that  he  did  not  observe 
such  precautions. 

Wilcox  says  :  "  Want  of  skill  does  not  mean  the  want  of 
the  greatest  possible  professional  talent  or  attainments,  still 
less  does  it  signify  the  having  erred  in  opinion  or  mode  of 
treatment,  but  the  want  of  that  general  or  ordinary  knowl- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  41 

edge  of  the  profession,  which  the  law  expects  of  every  man 
who  ventures  to  proclaim  himself  a  member  of  it,  or  a  total 
want  of  professional  skill  and  knowledge  in  a  particular 
operation  which  he  has  undertaken." 

In  a  recent  English  case  the  Court  said  :  "  To  render  a 
surgeon  liable,  even  civilly,  for  negligence  or  want  of  due 
skill,  it  is  not  enough  that  there  has  been  a  less  degree  of 
skill  than  some  other  professional  man  might  have  shown, 
there  must  have  been  a  want  of  competent  and  ordinary 
skill  and  to  such  a  degree  as  to  have  led  to  bad  results." 

§  15.       NOT    BOUND  TO  USE  THE  HIGHEST  DEGREE  OF  SKILL. 

Again,  a  dentist  is  not  bound  to  use  the  highest  degree 
of  skill,  but  he  must  use  reasonable  skill  and  diligence,  and 
in  judging  of  this,  regard  must  be  had  to  the  advance  in 
medical  and  surgical  knowledge  and  improvements  of  recent 
times.  (This  decision  is  quoted  from  the  medical  cases, 
Smithers  v.  Hawks,  34  la.,  286  ;  11  Am.  Rep.,  141  ;  Almon 
v.  Nugent,  34  la.,  300;  Haire  v.  Reese,  7  Phila.,  Pa.,  138  ; 
Lamphier  v.  Phipos,  14  jSTeb.,  403  ;  Ellwell  on  Malpractice, 
22,  24,  204 ;  Field's  Medico-Legal  Guide,  213  ;  Patten  v. 
Wiggins,  51  Me.,  594  ;  Carpenter  v.  Blake,  5  K  Y.,  696 ; 
Reynolds  v.  Graves,  3  "Wis.,  416.) 

The  law  requires  of  the  dentist  reasonable  skill  and  dil- 
igence in  the  treatment  of  patients  and  performance  of  his 
operations.  Dentists  would  be  held  liable  in  damages  for 
injuries  inflicted  in  their  professional  practice  and  operations, 
arising  from  the  want  of  proper  care,  skill,  and  attainments 
in  their  profession.  In  the  case  Simonds  v.  Henery  (39  Maine, 
155),  the  jury  was  instructed  that  if  the  surgeon  used  all  the 
knowledge  and  skill  to  which  the  art  of  medicine  had  at 
that  time  advanced,  nothing  more  would  be  required  of  him. 
An  exception  being  taken  to  this  charge,  the  Supreme  Court 
-aid  :  *'  It  is  undoubtedly  correct  that  no  more  would  be  re- 
quired of  him."  But  upon  legal  principles  could  so  much 
be  required  of  him  ?  We  think  not.  If  it  could,  then  every 
professional    man  would   be   bound    to  possess  the   higlics! 


42  DENTAL     .II  RISPRUDEKCE. 

attainments  and  exercise  the  greatest  skill  in  his  profession. 
Such  a  requirement  would  be  unreasonable. 

"  The  diligence  and  skill  required  are  reasonable  or 
ordinary  skill  or  diligence,  such  as  are  manifested  or  pos- 
sessed by  the  profession  as  a  body  ;  not  the  highest  degree  of 
skill,  not  that  skill  which  is  possessed  only  by  the  most  emi- 
nent of  the  profession."  (McClelland's  Civil  Malpractice,  p. 
521.)     Many  other  legal  decisions  are  cited. 

Ordinary  care  is  not  a  fixed  and  unalterable  standard  of 
care,  but  is  to  be  determined  by  the  facts  of  each  particular 
case,  and  is  as  variable  as  the  cases.     (42  Iowa,  44"'>. ) 

The  science  of  dentistry  is  constantly  changing  and  ad- 
vancing. Xew  treatments  and  operations  are  continually 
being  discovered  and  advocated  by  the  body  of  the  profes- 
sion, consequently  the  standard  of  "  ordinary"  knowledge 
and  skill  varies.  Many  methods  of  operating  and  treat- 
ments are  abandoned  and  superseded  by  others.  AVhen  such 
changes  become  generally  known  and  adopted  in  a  particular 
locality,  they  become  "ordinary;"  therefore  dental  practi- 
tioners of  such  localities  are  responsible  for  a  knowledge  of 
these  changes  and  expected  to  practice  them. 

The  Supreme  Court  in  the  case  of  McCandless  v.  McWha. 
(22  Pa.  St.,  261),  rendered  the  following  opinion  :  "  The 
standard  of  ordinary  skill  is  on  the  advance  ;  and  he  who 
would  not  be  found  wanting,  must  apply  himself  with  all 
the  diligence  to  the  most  accredited  sources  of  knowledge." 
There  is  a  distinction  to  be  noted  between  things  certain  and 
uncertain  in  medical  science  and  practice  in  fixing  responsi- 
bility. It  has  been  demonstrated  that  "  ordinary  "  knowl- 
edge may  become  ordinary  in  its  application.  This  is  true 
in  dentistry  as  well  as  in  medicine.  For  instance,  there 
may  be  two  or  more  remedies  for  the  same  disease  or  symp- 
tom ;  there  may  be  different  instruments  used  to  perform 
the  same  operation  ;  there  may  be  uncertainties  as  to  how 
ordinary  medicines  are  to  be  administered  in  cases  of  com- 
plicated diseases.  In  such  cases  a  physician  or  dentist  may 
have  to  rely  on  his  own  judgment  and  responsibility,  and 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  43 

where  reasonable  doubt  exists  he  is  not  liable  for  adverse  re- 
sults, if  he  does  the  best  he  can  under  the  circumstances. 

^    16.       A    DENTIST    CANNOT    EXPERIMENT    WITH    HIS    PATIENTS. 

A  dentist  must,  exercise  judgment  and  care  in  under- 
taking to  perform  a  new  operation  or  use  a  new  instrument. 
He  cannot  interpose  his  judgment  contrary  to  what  has 
become  a  settled  practice  or  custom. 

"Should  injury  result  from  experimentation  with  his 
patient,  he  can  be  held  liable  in  damages  for  the  same." 
(Patten  v.  Wiggins,  51  Me.,  594.) 

Experimentation  with  new  instruments  and  methods  is 
dangerous  for  the  first  time. 

In  the  case  of  Slater  v.  Baker,  2  Wils.,  359:  "Two 
surgeons  used  a  new  instrument  on  the  leg  of  a  patient 
which  had  been  broken,  for  the  purpose  of  lengthening  or 
straightening  it." 

An  action  for  malpractice  was  brought  against  the  sur- 
geons. The  substance  of  the  opinion  and  ruling  of  the 
court  was,  as  follows :  "  That  it  appeared  to  the  Court  that 
it  was  the  first  experiment  with  the  new  instrument.  If  it 
was,  it  was  a  rash  action ;  and  he  who  acts  rashly,  acts  igno- 
rantly.  And  though  the  defendants  may  be  as  skillful  in 
their  respective  professions  as  any  two  gentlemen  in  Eng- 
land, yet  the  Court  cannot  help  saying  that  in  this  par- 
ticular case  they  acted  ignorantly,  and  contrary  to  the  known 
rules  and  usages  of  surgeons." 

However,  if  a  dental  practitioner  has  a  new  mode  of 
operating  or  treatment  suggest  itself  to  him  as  applicable  to 
the  case,  and  it  is  founded  on  good  judgment,  and,  further- 
more, he  could  prove  that  it  was  advantageous  over  the  old 
methods  in  vogue,  or  that  it  was  the  only  one  available,  he 
is  privileged  to  practice  the  same ;  and  there  is  no  doubt  but 
that  the  jury  would  exonerate  him,  if  the  injury  could  not 
be  directly  attributed  to  an  unskillful  and  imprudent  opera- 
tion. 

When  such  operations  are  adopted  and  advocated  by 


44  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

the  body  of  the  profession,  according  to  the  accepted  views 
of  the  courts,  their  legality  is  established  beyond  question. 

§  17.      THE    QUESTION   OF    ABILITIES    DECIDED    BY    THE   JURY. 

In  each  case  the  jury  decides  whether  or  not  the  de- 
fendant possesses  ordinary  skill,  there  being  no  fixed  rule  on 
the  subject. 

It  will  not  be  sufficient  for  a  dentist  to  say  that  he  acted 
to  the  best  of  his  abilities,  because  he  should  have  formed  a 
more  just  estimate  of  his  own  capabilities,  before  he  under- 
took the  case. 

The  actual  amount  of  "  ordinary  skill "  varies  widely 
among  men  in  the  same  profession,  but  it  must  be  sufficient 
to  enable  him  without  fraud  to  assume  the  responsibility  of 
his  profession,  otherwise  every  professional  act  and  injury  at 
his  hands  is  a  fraud.  As  the  cases  are  variable,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  lay  down  any  requisite  standard  of  skill,  the 
want  of  which  would  in  any  particular  case,  hold  the  prac- 
titioner liable  in  malpractice. 

To  prove  that  he  possesses  the  ordinary  skill  the  den- 
tist may  adduce  evidence  to  establish  the  existence  of  such 
skill,  irrespective  of  the  particular  case.  This  may  be  shown 
by  those  of  the  same  profession,  who  can  speak  from  per- 
sonal knowledge  of  his  practice. 

§  18.      THE  STANDARD  OF  SKILL    VARIES   ACCORDING  TO  THE  CIR- 
CUMSTANCES  AND    LOCALITIES. 

Even  in  the  same  country,  state  or  locality  the  degree 
of  skill  required  of  the  dental  practitioner  may  vary  according 
to  the  circumstances.  It  must  be  taken  into  consideration 
that  in  country  towns  and  in  unsettled  portions  of  the  coun- 
try remote  from  cities,  the  dentist  has  not  the  advantages 
requisite  to  attaining  the  latest  knowledge,  both  practical 
and  theoretical,  of  all  the  dental  sciences,  because  he  can- 
not have  intercourse  with  the  leading  and  best  authorities  ;i- 
is  afforded  the  city  practitioner  ;  and  therefore  he  may  not 
have  kept  apace  with  the  progress  attained  in  dental  opera- 
tions; consequently,  he  is  not  expected  to  be  as  well  versed 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  45 

in  them  as  a  dentist  residing  in  a  large  city ;  and  it  would 
be  unreasonable  to  exact  from  one  in  such  circumstances 
that  high  skill  which  a  dentist  having  the  greater  opportuni- 
ties for  observation  and  experience,  would  be  expected  to 
possess. 

To  cite  a  medical  case  in  support  of  these  views :  "  An 
action  was  brought  against  a  physician  and  surgeon  for  not 
properly  treating  a  wound  on  the  plaintiff's  wrist.  There 
was  evidence  that  the  wound  was  a  severe  one,  requiring 
considerable  skill  in  its  treatment,  and  that  the  defendant 
had  no  experience  in  surgery  beyond  that  usually  pos- 
sessed by  country  physicians,  and  that  an  eminent  sur- 
geon lived  within  four  miles  of  the  defendant,  and  that 
the  latter  was  physically  able,  if  he  so  directed,  to  have 
visited  any  other  surgeon  than  the  defendant.  At  the 
request  of  the  plaintiff  the  judge  instructed  the  jury  that 
if  the  defendant  had  not  the  requisite  skill  and  experience 
to  treat  the  wound,  he  should  have  temporarily  dressed  it, 
and  recommended  the  plaintiff  to  a  more  skillful  surgeon. 
He  also  instructed  the  jury  against  the  objections  of  the 
plaintiff's  counsel,  that  the  implied  contract  of  a  physician 
and  surgeon,  was  that  he  possessed  that  reasonable  degree  of 
learning,  skill  and  experience  which  is  ordinarily  possessed 
by  others  of  his  profession,  having  regard  to  the  advanced 
state  of  the  science  of  surgery, '  and  that  the  defendant  was 
bound  to  possess  that  skill  only  which  physicians  and  sur- 
geons of  ordinary  ability  and  skill  practicing  in  similar  lo- 
calities, with  opportunities  for  no  larger  experience  ordinarily 
possess,  and  that  he  was  not  bound  to  possess  that  high 
degree  of  art  and  skill  possessed  by  eminent  surgeons  in 
large  cities,  and  making  a  specialty  of  the  practice  of  sur- 
gery; and  that  the  rule  applicable  to  the  case  was  not  appli- 
cable to  physicians  and  surgeons  alone,  and  was  not  confined 
to  other  members  of  the  learned  professions,  but  was  equally 
applicable  to  all  persons  holding  themselves  out  as  possess- 
ing special  skill  in  the  business  in  which  they  are  en- 
gaged.' "  Held  the  plaintiff  had  no  ground  for  exceptions. 
(Small  v.  Howard,  128  Mass.,  131, 1880.) 


46  DENTAL    -U  RISPRUDEN<  E. 

Li  the  case  of  Mallei]  v.  Boynton,  132  Mass.,  443,  1882, 
the  judge  instructed  the  jury,  as  follows:  That  if  the  prac- 
titioner had  not  the  requisite  skill  to  give  the  broken  arm 
the  treatment,  he  should  have  dressed  it  temporarily  and 
recommended  the  plaintiff  to  a  more  skillful  surgeon. 

These  principles  are  applicable  to  the  dentist  as  well  as 
the  physician  and  surgeon. 

§    19.      WHERE     LIFE    IS    ENDANGERED,   A    GREATER    DEGREE    OF 
SKILL    IS   REQUIRED    OF    TDK    DENTIST. 

A  much  stricter  standard  of  skill  than  ordinarily,  is  re- 
quired of  the  dentist  when  he  assumes  to  perform  an  opera- 
tion that  may  endanger  the  life  of  the  patient.  (Cayzer  v. 
Taylor,  10  Gray,  280;  Fletcher  v.  Boston,  1  Allen,  9.—  Wil- 
lard  on  Torts,  Vol.  1,  p.  118.)  What  would  be  "ordinary 
skill'"  in,  one  case,  would  be  gross  negligence  in  the  other. 
Here,  the  legal  interpretation  of  "  ordinary  skill,"  is  held  to 
include  all  the  knowledge  and  experience  the  profession  has 
attained  on  the  subject,  particularly  is  it  the  case  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  ana?sthetics. 

"  The  standard  of  skill  required  may  vary  according  to 
the  condition  of  the  patient."  This  is  illustrated  in  the  case 
of  Keily  v.  Colton,  1  N.  Y.  City  Ct.  Rep.,  439.  Here  the  de- 
fendants undertook  to  extract  a  tooth  while  the  patient  was 
under  the  influence  of  laughing  gas.  In  extracting  the  tooth, 
the  forceps  split,  and  part  of  the  tooth  went  down  the  plain- 
tiff's throat,  causing  coughing  and  vomiting,  which  con- 
tinued at  intervals  for  about  four  weeks.  Under  the  circum- 
stances, the  court  was  of  the  opinion  that  the  defendants  were 
bound  to  use  extraordinary  care.  "  They  knew  that  the 
plaintiff,  while  under  the  influence  of  the  anaesthetic,  had  no 
control  of  his  faculties ;  that  he  was  powerless  to  act,  and 
that  he  was  unable  to  exercise  the  slightest  effort  to  protect 
himself  from  any  probable  or  possible  consequences  of  the 
operation  that  they  had  undertaken  to  perform.  He  was  in 
their  charge  and  under  their  control  to  such  an  extent  they 
were  required  to  exercise  the  highest  professional  skill  and 
diligence,  to  avoid  every  possible  danger,  for  the  law  implies 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  47 

duties  on  men  according  to  the  circumstances  in  which  they 
are  called  on  to  act." 

§  20.    SPECIALISTS    AND    NTON-SPECIALISTS. 

The  law  recognizes  a  difference  existing  between  the 
relative  skill  and  knowledge  of  a  specialist  and  non-specialist. 

A  dentist  holding  himself  out  to  the  public  as  a  spe- 
cialist in  any  branch  of  dentistry,  whether  in  bridge  or 
crown  operations,  diseases  of  the  mouth,  administration  of 
nitrous  oxide  gas,  or  operative  dentistry,  is  by  law  supposed 
and  expected  to  possess  more  than  the  ordinary  skill  or 
knowledge  of  the  subject  required  of  a  general  practitioner. 

He  is  expected  to  possess  and  practically  use  the  highest 
skill  and  knowledge  his  profession  has  attained  on  the 
subject. 

When  a  patient  secures  the  services  of  a  dentist  for  the 
performance  of  a  special  operation  or  act,  and  the  said  dentist 
professes  to  be  a  specialist  in  such  operations,  the  patient 
expects  and  demands  more  than  the  ordinary  care  and  ser- 
vices, because  the  presumption,  both  civil  and  legal,  is  that, 
though  the  non-specialist  is  responsible  for  ordinary  care,  the 
specialist  or  expert  is  liable  for  special  care,  because  of  his 
especial  study  and  practice  of  the  specialty  which  he  follows. 

A  defendant  may  be  charged  with  the  lack  of  special 
care,  i.  e.,  such  care  as  a  professional  man  who  practices  that 
specialty  is  accustomed  to  give.  His  defense  is,  that  he  is 
not  a  specialist  in  this  branch,  and  that  he  never  claimed  to 
be,  and  further  avers  that  the  plaintiff  knew  he  was  not  a 
specialist.  If  this  be  true,  unless  it  can  be  proven  that  the 
defendant  exhibited  in  the  case  the  ignorance  of  the  ordinary 
knowledge  of  the  subject,  he  cannot  be  held  liable. 

§  21.    RESPONSIBILITY  OF  THE    DENTIST   FOR  AN    ERROR  OF   JUDG- 
MENT. 

In  cases  where  a  reasonable  doubt  or  uncertainty  exists, 
a  dentist  cannot  be  held  liable  for  an  honest  error  of  judgment. 

Where  uncertainties  exist  as  to  the  diagnosis  of  a  certain 
ease,  or  the  methods  of  treatment,  the  dentist  is  thrown  back 


48  DENTAL  JURISPRUDENCE. 

upon  his  own  mental  resources  and  responsibilities,  and  if  he 
acts  to  the  best  of  his  abilities  lie  is  not  held  responsible,  if 
his  judgment  should  lead  him  into  an  error. 

In  support  of  these  views  no  special  decisions  given  in 
dental  cases  can  be  cited  ;  but,  following  the  analogy  of  the 
judicial  decisions  rendered  in  other  learned  professions,  the 
presumption  is  that  the  general  rule  would  be  as  stated  above. 

A  case  (Percy  v.  Millavdon,  10  Mart.,  36)  in  point,  cited 
bv  Daniel  Nason,  Esq.,  the  substance  of  the  ruling  was,  as 
follows: 

"  It  has  been  said  that  it  will  not  be  sufhYient  for  a  pro- 
fessional man  to  say  he  acted  to  the  best  of  his  abilities, 
because  he  should  have  formed  a  more  just  estimate  of  his 
own  capacity  before  he  engaged  himself.  This  doctrine,  if 
sound,  would  make  an  attorney  responsible  for  every  error 
of  judgment,  no  matter  what  care  or  attention  he  exercised 
in  forming  his  opinion.  It  would  make  him  liable  in  cases 
where  the  wisdom  of  legality  of  one  or  more  alternatives  was 
presented  for  his  consideration,  no  matter  how  difficult  the 
subject."     Such  a  requirement  would  be  unreasonable. 

In  the  case  of  Leighton  v.  Sargent,  7  Foster,  X.  II.,  475, 
the  ruling  was  to  the  following  effect,  viz.  :  "  To  charge  them 
with  damages  on  the  grounds  of  unskillful  and  negligent 
treatment  of  his  patient's  case,  it  is  never  enough  to  show 
that  he  has  not  treated  his  patient  in  that  manner,  nor  used 
those  measures  which,  in  the  opinion  of  others,  even  medical 
men,  the  case  required,  because  such  evidence  only  tends  to 
prove  error  of  judgment,  for  which  he  is  not  responsible.'' 

In  the  case  of  Bogle  r.  Win  slow,  5  Phila.  Rep.,  13*3,  Judge 
Hare,  in  his  charge  to  the  jury,  said :  "  All  science  is  the 
result  of  a  voyage  of  exploration,  and  the  science  of  medicine 
can  hardly  be  said  to  have  reached  the  shore.  Men  must  be 
guided,  therefore,  by  what  is  probably  true,  and  are  not 
responsible  for  their  ignorance  of  the  absolute  truth  which  is 
not  known.  If  a  medical  practitioner  resorts  to  the  acknowl- 
edged proper  source  of  information  ;  if  he  sits  at  the  feet  of 
masters  of  high  reputation,  and  does  as  they  have  taught  him, 
he  has  done  his  duty,  and  should  not  be  made  answerable  for 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  49 

the  evils  that  may  result  from  errors  in  the  instruction  which 
he  has  received.  Medical  opinion  varies  from  time  to  time. 
What  is  taught  at  one  period  may  be  discovered  to  be  erron- 
eous at  another,  but  he  who  acts  according  to  the  best 
known  authority,  is  a  skilled  practitioner,  although  that 
authority  should  lead  him,  in  some  respects,  wrong." 

§  22.      NEGLIGENCE. 

Even  though  a  dental  practitioner  possess  ordinary  skill, 
he  is  still  liable  for  any  injury  which  may  result  from  his 
carelessness  or  negligence. 

A  negligent  offense  is  an  offense  which  ensues  from  a 
defective  discharge  of  duty,  which  defect  could  have  been 
avoided  by  the  exercise,  by  the  offender,  of  that  which  is 
usual  under  similar  circumstances,  with  prudent  persons  of  the 
same  class. 

Civil  law  affirms  the  existence  of  three  degrees  of  negli- 
gence, viz. :  slight,  ordinary,  and  gross. 

Slight  nea;lio;ence  is  the  want  of  srreat  care  and  diligence. 
(Story  Bailment,  sec.  17). 

Ordinary  negligence  is  the  want  of  ordinary  care  or 
diligence.     (Wyld  v.  Rickford,  8  Mees  and  W.,  443,  461.) 

Gross  negligence  is  the  want  of  even  slight  care  and  dil- 
igence.    (Cashill  v.  Wright,  6  El.  and  Bl.,  891,  899,  etc.) 

When  a  dentist  assumes  the  responsibility  and  under- 
takes the  care  of  a  patient,  or  to  perform  any  dental  opera- 
tion, whatever  its  nature,  he  is  bound  to  use  the  "  ordinary 
skill"  required  of  him,  and  exercise  due  care  and  diligence 
in  employing  it  in  any  given  case;  the  failure  to  do  so  con- 
stitutes negligence.  Legally,  a  dentist  is  held  liable  for 
injuries  resulting  from  a  want  of  care  or  diligence,  and  this 
without  reference  to  his  abilities. 

In  the  performance  of  his  professional  duties,  the  law 
requires  of  the  dentist  diligence  and  care,  as  well  as  pro- 
ficiency, and  negligence  is  punishable  no  less  than  want  of 
skill.  From  a  standpoint  of  civil  law  and  from  that  of  the 
moral  code,  tin;  practitioner,  who  possesses  skill  and  neglects 


50  DENTAL    JURI8PRUDEN<  E. 

to  apply  it  in  liis  treatment,  is  held  more  liable  than  one, 
who,  though  ignorant,  endeavors  to  produce  a  cure. 

There  is  no  fixed  rule  as  to  what  constitutes  due  care 
and  diligence  in  every  case;  usually  it  is  decided  by  the  jury 
upon  the  evidence  presented.  In  many,  the  evidence  pro- 
duced conclusively  proves  carelessness,  without  further  ques- 
tioning, as  where  a  dentist  extracts  a  sound  tooth  instead  of 
the  diseased  one. 

It  seems  that  by  reason  of  a  delicate  condition  of  health, 
the  consequences  of  a  negligent  injury  are  more  serious  still ; 
for  those  consequences  the  defendant  is  liable,  although  they 
are  aggravated  by  the  imperfect  bodily  condition  of  the  pa- 
tient. (Ct.  of  App.,  1884;  Tice  v.  Munn,  94  ]ST.  Y.,  621,  and 
sec.  96  X.  Y.,  264 ;  Abbot's  N".  Y.  Digest,  233.) 

In  an  action  against  a  surgeon,  it  is  necessary  for  the 
plaintiff  to  affirmativel}'  prove  all  the  elements  of  negli- 
gence charged,  including  defendant's  want  of  skill  or  knowl- 
edge, where  that  is  relied  upon.  (Leighton  v,  Sargent,  11 
Foster,  119.) 

The  production  of  the  simple  evidence  as  to  the  mode 
of  treatment  pursued  by  the  defendant  in  the  particular  case 
at  issue  is  sufficient  for  this  purpose.  If  that  indicates  want 
of  skill,  it  is  unnecessary  to  go  outside  of  the  case  for  proof 
upon  that  point.  (Carpenter  v.  Blake,  60  Barb.,  488.)  The 
defendant  may,  howrever,  produce  evidence  of  his  general 
skill,  where  an  issue  is  made  upon  his  possession  of  skill, 
and  not  merely  upon  his  use  of  it.  And  where  there  is 
much  doubt  as  to  the  skillfulness  of  his  treatment  of  the 
particular  case,  evidence  of  his  general  skillfulness  will  be 
material  upon  all  the  issues  of  the  case,  for  if  he  had  skill, 
it  is  but  natural  to  presume  that  he  used  it.  But  where  the 
plaintiff  does  not  question  the  defendant's  general  skillful- 
ness, evidence  thereof  is  not  competent  on  behalf  of  the 
defendant  in  a  case  not  otherwise  evenly  balanced.  (Mertz 
v.  Serg.,  376  ;  Seare  v.  Prentice,  8  East,  348.) 

But  to  rebut  evidence  introduced  by  the  defendant  to 
support  his  general  professional  character,  it  is  competent  to 
show  that  he  is  not  a  regular  practitioner. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  51 

The  fact  that  some  surgeons  approve  of  the  practice 
adopted  does  not  necessarily  preclude  a  jury  from  condemn- 
ing it  as  negligent,  if  the  decided  weight  of  authority  is  to 
that  effect.     (Carpenter  v.  Blake,  60  Barb.,  488.) 

"  If  a  person  is  injured  by  the  negligence  of  another,  it 
is  no  defense  for  the  wrong-doer  '  that  others  acted  in  the 
same  way  as  he  did.'  "    (Hill  v.  Winsor,  118  Mass.,  251, 1875.) 

That  the  service  rendered  was  gratuitous  is  no  defense 
for  a  suit  for  negligence. 

Again,  a  person  suing  for  malpractice  must  prove  it. 
(Baird  v.  Marford.) 

"Where  there  has  been  mutual  negligence,  and  the  negli- 
gence of  each  party  is  the  proximate  cause  of  the  injury,  no 
action  whatever  can  be  maintained  by  the  party  receiving 
the  injury.  (Hamilton  v.  Des  Moines  E.  Co.,  36  Iowa 
Rep.,  31.) 

Whenever  death  shall  be  occasioned  by  unlawful  vio- 
lence or  negligence,  and  suit  for  damages  be  not  brought  by 
the  party  injured,  during  his  or  her  life,  the  widow  of  any 
such  deceased,  or  if  there  be  no  widow,  the  personal  repre- 
resentative,  may  maintain  an  action  and  recover  damages  for 
the  death  thus  occasioned. 

Again,  if  the  action  was  brought  during  the  life  time  of 
the  plaintiff,  it  shall  not  abate  by  reason  of  his  death,  but 
the  personal  representative  of  the  deceased  may  be  substituted 
as  plaintiff  and  prosecute  the  suit  to  final  judgment  and 
satisfaction. 

The  above  principles  relating  to  negligence,  are  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  authorized  legal  views  on  the  subject. 
Negligence  is  always  a  question  for  decision  by  the  jury,  and 
La  based  upon  the  evidence  presented  in  the  case. 

In  the  case  of  Grove  v.  Stewart  and  Sharp  (New  York 
Supreme  Ct.,  1890),  dentists,  C.  H.  Stewart  and  Samuel  P. 
Sharp,  were  sued  by  Miss  Emma  Grove  for  negligence  in 
allowing  the  tooth  extracted  to  drop  into  her  lungs,  causing 
her  severe  injury.  A  verdict  of  $1,200  was  rendered  in  favor 
of  the  plaintiff.  Keily  v.  Colton,  (1  N.  Y.  City  Ct.  Rep.r 
439 »,  i-  a  case  of  the  same  nature.    Koskey  v.  Y.  k  T.  Tunstall 


52  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

New  Orleans),  mulcted  in  $5,000  damages  for  injury  to  the 
face,  due  to  negligence  while  performing  dental  operations. 

In  the  case  of  Matthews  v.  Conrad,  the  defendant  was 
charged  with  neglect  and  unskillfulness  in  the  treatment  of 
the  plaintiff,  resulting  in  the  forming  of  an  abscess  and  con- 
sequent injuries. 

The  case  was  tried  in  the  Supreme  Court,  District  of 
North  Carolina,  in  1890,  but  the  plaintiff  failed  to  recover, 
and  was  compelled  to  pay  costs.  The  following  is  an  ab- 
stract of  the  circumstances  as  detailed  by  the  defendant : 

MATTHEWS  V.  CONRAD. 

"  On  January  18th,  Mr.  F.  L.  Matthews,  a  young  man 
about  32  years  of  age,  presented  himself  at  our  office,  stating 
that  he  had  lost  a  filling  out  of  one  of  his  teeth  and  would  like 
the  tooth  refilled.  I  found  the  second  bicuspid  had  lost  a 
filling  that  had  been  put  in,  according  to  the  statement  of 
the  patient,  twelve  years  before.  There  had  been  some  decay 
in  the  cavity,  and  the  enamel  worn  off  the  grinding  surface. 
I  prepared  the  tooth  for  filling,  found  a  corner  of  the  pulp 
exposed,  this  I  touched  with  carbolic  acid,  and  capped  with 
dento-plastique.  I  inserted  a  compound  gold  filling,  supply- 
ing the  place  of  the  lost  enamel  on  the  grinding  surface  with 
gold.  Several  other  teeth  needed  filling,  which  I  filled,  as 
the  patient  wanted  everything  done  that  was  needed  to  the 
teeth. 

"  The  occlusion  was  abnormal,  the  lower  incisors  strik- 
ing almost  squarely  against  the  upper,  and  the  four  superior 
incisors  with  the  left  canine  had  worn  away  about  half  of  the 
crown,  and  there  was  a  space  of  half  a  line  between  these 
teeth  and  the  lowrer,  when  the  jawrs  were  closed.  I  advised 
with  my  partner,  Dr.  Watkins,  who  with  me  thought  the 
only  way  to  stop  the  abrasion  was  to  cap  the  four  superior 
incisors  and  left  canine  with  gold,  building  them  up  a  half  a 
line  and  making  them  occlude  with  the  lower.  The  teeth  had 
never  given  pain,  were  not  at  all  clouded,  indicating  a  dead 
pulp.  I  prepared  and  filled  the  canine  and  left  lateral  the 
lirst  sitting,  was  careful   to  make  the   cavity  not  deeper 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  53 

than  thought  necessary  and  made  retaining  pits  just  under 
the  enamel.  The  tooth  responded  to  cold  water  and  the  in- 
strument slightly,  but  nothing  to  cotton  fibre,  so  I  was  satis- 
fied the  nerve  was  alive  but  not  exposed.  Believing  from 
every  indication  there  was  a  deposit  of  secondary  dentine  I 
had  but  little  to  fear  on  this  line. 

On  the  following  morning,  when  the  patient  returned,  I 
asked  if  the  teeth  filled  the  day  before  had  given  pain,  his 
answer  was,  "  Xo,  not  at  all."  The  centrals  were  filled  that 
day  and  the  following  day,  January  24th,  1889.  I  finished 
and  dismissed  the  patient  perfectly  satisfied  as  he  expressed 
himself.  I  charged  him  carefully,  if  there  was  any  soreness 
or  pain  in  the  teeth  after  two  or  three  days — leaving  long 
enough  for  them  to  get  well  from  the  operation — that  he 
should  come  to  the  office,  and  I  would  treat  them  for  him ; 
for  teeth  in  the  condition  of  his  are  always  more  or  less  liable 
to  give  pain,  death  of  the  pulp,  and  I  had  filled  them  to  pre- 
vent that,  thinking  they  would  last  twenty  years  or  more. 

"I  met  the  patient  often,  but  heard  no  complaint,  until 
March  4th.  I  met  him  at  church  at  night.  He  stated  that 
he  had  been  unwell  for  several  days,  and  that  one  of  his 
teeth  had  been  sore,  and  the  gum  was  swollen  and  the  tooth 
a  little  loose.  I  told  him  he  ought  to  have  come  before  it 
got  so  bad,  but  to  go  with  me  to  the  office  and  I  would  open 
the  tooth  and  give  relief;  that  unless  that  was  done,  I  feared 
he  would  not  sleep  much.  He  said  he  felt  too  bad  to  go  that 
night,  but  would  be  down  early  in  the  morning.  He  came, 
the  tooth  was  loose  and  the  gum  swollen.  "With  a  spear- 
pointed  drill  I  opened  through  the  filling  to  the  pulp  cham- 
ber, and  with  a  broach  extracted  the  pulp  which  was  of  a 
dark  red  color,  the  removal  giving  very  little  pain.  I  showed 
it  to  the  patient  and  told  him  I  thought  his  trouble  with  the 
tooth  was  over.  I  left  the  drain  open,  and  painted  the  gum 
with  tr.  iodine;  made  two  applications  of  this  before  he  left 
the  office  and  gave  him  some  capsicum  plasters,  with  the 
instruction  to  apply  them  that  afternoon  if  the  pain  did  not 
cease.  I  dismissed  him  with  an  engagement  to  call  the  next 
morning.     Tie  was  complaining  with  pains  all   over,  espe- 


54  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

cially  in  his  Leg3,  which  made  him  walk  like  a  man  in- 
toxicated. 

"  Next  morning  he  sent  word  he  was  not  able  to  come  to 
the  office,  ami  wished  I  would  come  to  sec  him  as  he  was 
still  suffering.  I  found  him  in  bed,  the  face  considerably 
swollen  and  the  tooth  very  loose.  I  lanced  the  gum  well, 
but  failed  to  find  any  pus.  I  forced  the  broach  in  the  pulp 
chamber  as  far  as  I  could,  but  found  no  pus.  He  had  used 
the  capsicum  plasters. 

"  The  following  morning  his  physician  called  at  our  office 
and  asked  me  if  I  did  not  think  that  tooth  would  have  to  be 
extracted.  He  said  the  patient  was  suffering  with  bilious 
fever,  and  that  he  was  under  the  impression  the  tooth  would 
have  to  come  out.  I  thought  we  would  make  another  effort 
to  save  it,  and  went  over  to  see.  I  found  the  patient  in  the 
same  condition,  and  the  pus  had  burrowed  its  way  to  the 
surface  at  the  neck  of  the  tooth.  I  opened  it  with  a  lance 
and  left  it  to  heal.     The  adjoining  teeth  were  slightly  sore. 

u  Pain  continued  in  the  bones  of  the  face,  as  well  as  in  other 
parts  of  the  body,  and  the  next  morning  the  tooth  was  so 
loose  that  I  believed  the  peridental  membrane  had  been 
destroyed.  The  patient  and  his  mother  were  anxious  to  have 
the  tooth  extracted.  I  yielded  and  found  the  membrane 
gone  as  I  expected,  though  there  was  no  discharge  of  pus 
or  sign  of  a  sack.  All  the  anterior  teeth  were  sore,  those 
that  had  not  been  filled  as  well  as  the  others.  The  pain  was 
all  through  the  jaw  and  not  local.  The  gums  were  very 
little  changed  except  over  the  tooth  that  was  extracted; 
this  was  congested  and  angry-looking.  I  left  asking  to  be 
notified  of  the  condition  of  the  patient.  One  or  two  morn- 
ings after,  I  was  sent  for  to  extract  another  tooth,  and  I 
found  the  central  loose,  and  removed  it — the  peridentium 
was  destroyed  two-thirds  the  way  from  the  apex.  I  told  his 
mother  all  the  anterior  teeth  would  probably  have  to  be 
removed,  as  periodontitis  had  set  in  and  was  attacking  the 
sound  teeth,  and  that  to  remove  them  as  they  became  in- 
volved, was  the  only  remedy  for  them  in  this  condition. 

"  There  was  no  sign  of  an  alveolar  abscess  except  with 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 


55 


the  first  tooth,  and  no  health}-  pus  discharge  after  the  gum 
was  lanced. 

"  My  partner  went  with  me  and  we  met  the  physician, 
who  agreed  to  all  I  did,  and  said  that  it  was  a  decided  case 
of  bilious  fever,  and  that  he  was  treating  him  for  that.  We 
were  satisfied  with  his  treatment,  and  said  nothing  about  it, 
except  Dr.  Watkins  suggested  that  the  doctor  make  him  a 
mouth-wash  of  wine  and  opium,  to  be  used  after  the  teeth 
were  extracted  ;  and  on  another  visit,  when  the  patient  com- 
plained of  the  bad  taste,  Dr.  W.  gave  him  a  wash  of  phenol- 
sodique. 

"Eight  of  the  teeth  were  removed  as  they  became 
involved,  leaving  three  in  the  superior  maxillary,  the  others 
beino-  extracted  before.  We  made  no  direct  local  treatment, 
except  the  mouth- washes. 

"I  made  two  or  three  visits  after  the  last  tooth  was 
extracted,  and  finding  the  mouth  needed  no  other  treatment 
at  that  time,  for  the  swelling  had  subsided  from  the  cheeks, 
and  the  condition  of  the  gums  improving,  as  I  thought,  so  I 
told  the  patient  I  could  not  see  I  could  do  anything,  but 
would  come  any  time  he  needed  me,  and  would  remove  the 
other  teeth,  if  he  found  they  gave  him  trouble. 

"  I  saw  his  half-brother  on  the  street,  and  asked  after 
him,  one  or  two  days  after  I  was  there,  and  he  reported  him 
'  better.'  I  inquired  of  him  almost  every  day,  and  received 
the  same  answer.  In  the  meantime,  I  left  town  for  five  days, 
and  on  my  return  asked  Dr.  Watkins  if  he  had  heard  from 
him.  He  said  he  had  heard  every  day  or  so,  and  that  he  was 
much  better. 

"After  three  weeks  from  the  time  I  made  the  last  visit, 
my  uncle  spent  the  night  there,  and  the  next  day  told  me 
Frank's  mouth  was  in  a  terrible  fix.  I  could  not  go  right 
away,  but  asked  Dr.  Watkins  to  go,  and  he  went  in  a  few 
minutes  after  he  heard  that  he  was  not  doing  well.  They 
told  Dr.  W.  that  Dr.  Lott,  his  physician,  was  not  doing  him 

any  good,  so  they  sent  for  Dr.  II ,  who  was  an  old,  ex- 

|MTiono<;<l   dentist,  and  he  was  treating  it.     Dr.  II told 


56  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENI  I. 

me  he  found  the  process  exfoliated;  this  lie  removed  after 
injecting  a  soothing  remedy." 

In  the  suit  brought  the  charge  was  carelessness,  igno- 
rance and  unskillt'ulness  in  filling  the  teeth,  which  caused  the 
abscess,  and  about  the  same,  when  summoned  to  treat  the 
teeth  while  he  was  sick  ;  with  refusing  to  use  the  remedies 
laid  down  by  the  profession  tor  the  treatment  of  such  teeth. 

The  young  man  was  in  apparent  good  health  at  the 
time  the  work  was  done,  though  several  months  before  he 
had  been  on  a  trip  West,  and  was  unwell  for  a  long  time 
after  his  return. 

An  expert  has  given  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  necrosis 
was  due  to  some  specific  disease,  though  no  evidence  can  be 
brought  forward  to  show  that  the  young  man  ever  had 
syphilis,  though  his  early  life  was  very  immoral,  and  his 
father  was  even  worse. 

One  point  omitted  in  its  place:  "About  the  time  the 
second  tooth  was  extracted,  I  noticed  the  mucous  membrane 
in  the  roof  of  the  mouth  had  puffed  up  about  the  size  of  an 
almond.  The  physician  had  lanced  this,  and  I  lanced  it  once 
or  twiee,  there  was  no  discharge,  but  a  little  blood  mucous."' 

§   23.      CONTRIBUTORY    NEGLIGENCE. 

The  importance  of  contributory  negligence  as  a  factor 
in  deciding  many  malpractice  suits  is  not  to  be  overrated ; 
for  therein  lies  a  powerful  defense  for  the  dentist  charged 
with  malpractice,  because  the  nature  of  the  evidence  adduced 
thereby  is  such  as  will  conclusively  determine  whether  the 
defendant  is  wholly  responsible  for  the  injuries  charged  by 
the  plaintiff,  or  if  the  latter,  by  any  indiscretion  or  negli- 
gence, materially  aided  in  causing  them.  In  the  majority  of 
rases  of  alleged  malpractice,  if  it  could  be  proven,  it  would 
be  found  that  the  deviations  and  departures  of  the  patient 
from  the  strict  line  of  good  sense,  and  treatment  advised  and 
prescribed  by  the  professional  attendant,  has  been  the  pri- 
mary cause  of  a  series  of  unfortunate  mishaps  for  which  the 
blame  afterwards  is  thrown  upon  the  latter.  It  is  plainly 
seen  that  the  burden  of  responsibility  should  be  shifted  from 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  57 

the  adviser  to  the  patient,  and  the  dentist  ceases  both  legally 
and  morally  to  be  liable,  because  of  the  neglect  of  the  patient 
to  follow  out  the  course  of  treatment  advised. 

The  doctrine  of  contributory  negligence  as  applied  to 
dentistry  is,  as  follows :  When  a  dentist  is  held  liable  for 
injuries  inflicted  by  reason  of  his  lack  of  ordinary  skill  or 
actual  negligence,  the  legal  presumption  is  that  there  has 
been  no  contributory  negligence  on  the  part  of  the  patient ; 
but  if  it  can  be  proven  that  a  person  who  has  received  an 
injury  by  the  ignorance  or  negligence  of  a  dentist,  has  in  any 
way,  by  his  own  negligence,  actually  aided  in  causing  the 
injury,  he  cannot  recover  damages  therefor.     To  cite  a  case: 

If  in  the  treatment  of  an  alveolar  abscess,  the  patient 
neglected  to  follow  the  dentist's  advice  in  every  particular, 
and  adverse  results  should  occur,  such  as  a  fistulous  opening 
of  the  outside  of  the  cheek,  no  suit  could  be  successfully 
maintained  against  the  dentist. 

Considered  from  a  professional  and  practical  standpoint, 
it  is  undeniably  the  reasonable  duty  of  the  patient  to  co-oper- 
ate with  his  professional  adviser  to  aid  in  the  attainment  of 
the  favorable  result  desired.  Primarily  he  should  obey  all 
instructions,  and  he  is  also  required  to  exercise  his  reason  in 
such  a  maimer  as  to  further  what  is  being  done  by  his  dentist. 
Upon  his  faithful  discharge  of  the  trust  reposed  in  him  de- 
pends his  right  to  question  his  professional  attendant's  actions. 
It  is  a  mutual  trust,  and  whoever  violates  the  same  is  re- 
sponsible for  any  resultant  injury,  and  if  both  are  equally 
guilty  of  neglect,  the  defendant  cannot  be  held  accountable 
for  the  unfavorable  results,  because  of  the  failure  of  the  plain- 
tiff to  obey  the  instructions  which  would  possibly  have  been 
beneficial  and  lead  to  more  favorable  results  had  his  treat- 
ment been  followed  out.  The  recent  case  of  the  Richmond 
Tooth  Crown  Company  v.  Pormner  (case  not  reported),  is  an 
illustration  ol*  this  doctrine.  Dr.  Sheffield  acting  for  the  com- 
pany,  fitted  in  the  mouth  of  the  patient  a  piece  of  crown  and 
bridge-work.  Mrs.  Pommer  not  having  paid  the  bill,  an 
action  to  recover  the  amount  of  the  same  was  brought  againsl 
her.    Tlif  defendant  averred  that  there  was  gross  malpractice 


58  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

in  performing  the  operation  ;  that  sin-  had  suffered  greatly 
therefrom,  and  that  her  jaw  had  been  severely  injured  and 

distorted. 

The  plaintiff  proved  that  these  dentures,  when  first  put 
in,  might  cause  pain,  and  that  as  other  artificial  dentures  re- 
quire adaptation  to  the  mouth,  and  further  that  it  was  proper 
and  usual  for  the  patient  to  have  this  done,  and  though  this 
patient  had  an  appointment  for  this  purpose,  had  neglected 
to  do  so,  but  after  a  long  delay  had  gone  to  another  dentist 
or  physician  and  had  the  original  operation  removed.  The 
defendant  had  not  only  refused  to  pay,  but  had  demanded 
large  damages  for  her  sufferings  and  the  injury  alleged  to 
have  been  done  her  jaw.  On  consideration  of  these  facts,  the 
judge  substantially  charged  the  jury  as  law,  that  if  in  their 
opinion  the  defendant  had  by  her  failure  to  return  to  the 
plaintiff  and  permit  the  proper  adjustment  of  the  operation, 
materially  contributed  to  the  injury  complained  of,  she  was 
guilty  of  contributory  negligence  and  could  not  recover.  The 
jury  returned  a  verdict  in  favor  of  the  company.  (This  case 
is  cited  by  Daniel  !Nason,  Esq.)  On  the  subject  of  contributory 
negligence  the  following  legal  decisions  can  be  appropriately 
quoted,  viz. : 

"  It  is  a  well-known  principle  of  law,  that  a  party  seek- 
ing to  recover  for  an  injury,  must  not  have  contributed  to  it 
in  any  degree,  either  by  his  negligence  or  disregard  of  a  duty 
imposed  on  him  by  a  party  who,  by  his  negligence  or  want 
of  skill  or  care,  may  also,  in  some  degree,  have  contributed 
to  the  injury."     (Smith  v.  Smith,  2  Pick.) 

Again,  "A  patient  cannot  recover,  either  in  contract  or 
in  tort,  for  injuries  consequent  upon  unskillful  or  negligent 
treatment  by  the  physician,  if  his  own  negligence  directly 
contributed  to  them  to  any  extent,  that  cannot  be  distin- 
guished or  separated."  (Hubbard  v.  Thompson,  109  Mass., 
286 ;  Geiselman  v.  Scott,  25  0.  S.,  86.) 

"  Questions  of  contributory  negligence  must  be  made 
very  clear  before  a  court  is  warranted  in  withholding  an  in- 
quiry in  respect  to  them  from  the  jury."  (Weil  v.  Wright, 
Sup.  Ct.,  29  K  Y.  S.  R.,  763;  8  KY.  Supp.,  776.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  0\) 

"•In  an  action  for  negligence,  the  plaintiff's  concurrent 
negligence  is  a  complete  defense."  (Bush  v.  Brainard,  1  Con., 
78  ;  Hartfield  v.  Roper,  21  Wend.,  615  ;  Brightley's  K  Y. 
Digest,  3  Edit.,  2760.) 

"  Contributory  negligence,  to  constitute  a  defense,  must 
refer  to  the  direct  occasion  of  the  injury,  and  not  to  the  re- 
mote cause  of  it."  (Lauren  v.  Albany  Gas-light  Co.,  44  N. 
Y.,  459  S.  C. ;  46  Barb.,  264.) 

"  Contributory  negligence  is  a  good  defense  to  action  for 
damages  for  a  personal  injury,  and  it  is  immaterial  to  what 
extent  it  is  proven,  provided  it  contributed  to  the  injury." 
(Gerity  v.  Haley,  29  W.  Va.,  98.) 

Jj  24.    DAMAGES. 

In  civil  suits  for  injuries  arising  from  malpractice,  the 
amount  of  damages  recoverable  is  variable,  and,  to  a  great 
extent,  is  a  question  for  the  decision  of  the  jury. 

In  estimating  the  amount  of  damages,  the  jury  must 
take  into  consideration  the  bodily  pain  and  suffering,  the 
loss  of  time  occasioned  the  patient  by  the  injury,  the  expense 
incurred,  and  whether  the  injury  is  temporary  or  permanent 
and  affects  his  capacity  to  pursue  his  customary  work. 

The  verdict  of  the  jury  can  be  set  aside,  if  the  damages 
awarded  are  so  excessive  and  unjust  as  to  induce  the  court 
to  believe  that  the  jurors  acted  from  prejudice,  partiality,  or 
corruption. 

Again,  the  plaintiff  is  not,  in  any  case,  entitled  to  re- 
cover anything  on  account  of  pain  and  suffering  caused  by 
the  disease  and  injury  itself,  but  only  for  such  additional 
pain  and  suffering  as  is  produced  by  the  negligence  or  want 
of  proper  care  and  skill  by  the  defendant.  (Wenger  v.  Cal- 
der,  78  111.,  275.) 

It  has  been  decided  that  "  mental  suffering,  caused  by 
a  personal  injury,  however  slight,  is  a  proper  element  of 
ilarnages  against  the  person  legally  liable  for  such  injury." 
(Canning  v.  Williams,  1  Cush,  451,  1848  ;  Tyler  v.  Pome- 
roy,  8  Allen,  480,  1864;  Smith  v.  Holcomb,  99  Mass.,  552, 
1868.) 


60  DENTAL    JURISPRUDEN<  I  . 

§  25.    THE    FRACTURE  OF  Til  K    JAWS    (THE    ALVEOLUS  OP  THE    SU- 
PERIOR  OR    INFERIOR  MAXILLA),  DURING    THE 
EXTRACTION   OF  TEETH. 

Numerous  civil  suits  have  been  instituted  against  den- 
tists for  malpractice,  in  causing  the  fracture  of  the  maxilla, 
by  carelessness  in  the  extraction  of  teeth. 

To  uphold  this  charge,  it  devolves  upon  the  plaintiff  to 
establish,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  court,  that  such  injury  in 
reality  exists,  either  by  the  affidavit  or  testimony  of  the 
physician  called  to  treat  the  injury  complained  of,  or  it  may 
involve  the  actual  exhibition  or  examination  of  the  injury  in 
court.  The  plaintiff  must  also  prove  that  the  injury  was  re- 
ceived at  the  hands  of  the  defendant,  unless  it  is  admitted 
by  the  latter  that  he  was  the  direct  or  indirect  causal  thereof. 

The  next  step  in  the  proceedings  is  to  demonstrate  that 
the  injury  was  due  to  malpractice,  and  to  show  the  nature 
thereof:  whether  ignorant,  due  to  want  of  skill ;  willful  or 
negligent  malpractice,  from  carelesness  in  performing  the 
operation. 

The  legal  question  next  arises  :  What  is  the  extent  of 
the  injury?  Its  eharaeter?  This  is  of  much  importance  to 
the  defendant,  and,  in  a  measure,  will  influence  the  decision 
of  the  jury. 

It  may  be  only  the  fracture  of  the  alveoli  septum.  In 
many  cases  the  roots  have  become  attached  to  the  alveoli 
septum.  This  is  due  to  the  similarity  of  composition  of  the 
cementum  and  the  bone.  Under  these  circumstances,  natur- 
ally the  septum  will  separate  itself  from  the  outer  and  inner 
plate  of  the  alveolus,  and  remain  attached  to  the  tooth. 
Therefore,  the  tooth  cannot  be  extracted  without  the  septum 
coming  away  with  it.  The  patient  sees  the  piece  of  bone 
attached  to  the  tooth,  and  believes  the  jaw  has  been  frac- 
tured, and  should  any  unwonted  trouble  follow  the  extraction 
of  the  tooth,  they  believe  there  are  just  grounds  for  the 
charge  of  malpractice.  The  charge,  therefore,  should  not  be 
upheld,  as  the  injury  is  not  due  either  to  negligence  or  to 
the  want  of  skill  or  care.    So,  also,  where  a  fracture  of  either 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  61 

the  outer  or  inner  plate  of  the  alveolus  is  caused  during  ex- 
traction. It  may  be  due  to  the  attachment  of  the  roots  of 
the  teeth  to  the  alveolar  plates,  or  the  bones  being  weak  or 
thin,  or  necrosis  may  have  weakened  the  structure  thereof. 
The  external  plate  of  the  superior  maxilla  is  thin  through- 
out the  entire  surface,  so  much  so,  that  the  roots  are  fre- 
quently bared  in  macerating  the  bone. 

During  extraction  the  alveolar  plates  are  spread  so  as  to 
allow  the  removal  of  the  tooth.  In  some  cases  the  roots  are 
divergent  and  wider  than  the  tooth  at  the  neck,  where  it  is 
encircled  by  the  alveolus. 

During  this  spreading  process  in  extraction,  these  thin 
walls  may  split,  and  a  considerable  fracture  may  result. 
The  accident  may  also  occur  in  the  inferior  maxilla. 

Again,  exostosis  of  the  tooth  may,  by  reason  of  the  ab- 
normally enlarged  root,  cause  fracture  while  extracting  a 
tooth. 

The  patient  may  contribute  to  the  injury  by  suddenly 
starting  or  jumping  or  changing  the  position  first  assumed, 
thereby  giving  the  forceps  a  sudden  jerk,  causing  a  slight  or 
serious  and  extensive  fracture  of  the  alveolus.  Such  injuries 
as  just  described  cannot  be  attributed  to  the  want  of  skill  or 
the  exercise  of  proper  care  and  discretion  on  the  part  of  the 
dental  practitioner.  Being  accidental,  and  the  charge  of 
malpractice  not  proven,  the  case  would  be  dismissed. 

Again,  two  teeth  may  be  attached  to  one  another  by 
means  of  the  alveolar  plates  and  septum.  In  attempting  to 
extract  one  tooth,  the  other  tooth,  or  perhaps  two  or  more 
teeth,  may  also  come  out,  and  with  a  considerable  portion  of 
the  alveolus  attached.  A  number  of  such  accidents  have 
been  recorded. 

Whenever  the  movement  of  one  of  the  teeth  is  found  to 
eause  a  similar  disturbance  in  another,  it  can  safely  be 
diagnosed  that  the  teeth  are  joined.  In  such  circumstances, 
the  safest  plan  would  seem  to  be  to  cut  between  them  by 
means  of  drills,  saws  or  files,  so  as  to  sever  the  connection 
before  attempting  to  remove  the  tooth.  Whether  the  non- 
recognition  of  the  teeth  being  joined,  and  the  cutting  apart 


62  DBHTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

of  the  same  before  extraction,  and  the  subsequent  accident, 
as  detailed  above,  would  constitute  just  grounds  for  a  ver- 
dict of  malpractice,  is  for  the  jury  to  decide. 

As  these  accidental  fractures  occur  suddenly  and  unex- 
pectedly, in  the  opinion  of  the  author,  the  peculiar,  natural 
and  other  circumstances  which  tend  to  produce  them,  as  re- 
lated above,  are  important  factors  to  be  considered  in  decid- 
ing this  class  of  suits.  But  on  the  other  hand,  the  dental 
surgeon  who  fractures  the  maxilla  during:  the  extraction  of 
an  ordinary  tooth,  with  no  just  cause  for  the  offense,  should 
be  mulcted. 

In  cases  where  the  dental  practitioner  is  charged  with 
causing  the  fracture  of  the  maxilla,  by  carelessness  in  the 
extraction  of  the  teeth,  the  case  of  Dr.  "YVestby,  a  practicing 
dentist  in  New  York  city,  can  be  cited.  This  action  was 
brought  against  him  about  eight  years  ago  in  the  New  York 
Supreme  Court.  The  details  and  facts  of  the  case  are,  as  fol- 
lows: 

One  evening,  a  woman,  a  teacher  of  music,  called  on  Dr. 
Westby  to  extract  one  or  two  molar  teeth.  Gas  was  admin- 
istered, and  in  endeavoring  to  remove  the  second  molar  or 
wisdom  tooth,  it  was  fractured,  and  the  surrounding  parts 
were  lacerated  in  the  efforts  made,  by  gas  light,  to  remove 
the  remaining  portion  of  the  roots.  Severe  inflammation 
ensued.  The  patient  was  put  to  bed  and  nursed  by  a  young 
physician,  who  testified  at  the  trial  that  the  jaw  had  been 
fractured.  Dr.  Hesbrouke  offered  testimony  to  prove  that, 
the  jaw  had  not  been  fractured,  showing  that  the  word 
"  fracture"  has  its  proper  signification  and  limitation,  when 
applied  to  these  cases,  as  the  alveolar  process  is  nearly 
always  fractured  in  the  extraction  of  a  tooth,  for  it  may  be 
only  a  small  fragment  of  the  septum  of  the  bone. 

The  plaintiff  claimed  to  have  lost  two  months  time,  etc. 
The  jury  rendered  a  verdict  in  her  favor  of  twelve  hundred 
dollars,  with  costs,  and  a  special  allowance  for  counsel  fees. 

The  following  are  the  particulars  of  a  similar  ease  occur- 
ring in  Philadelphia: 

Dr.   B.  F.  Williams,  (case  not  given  in  court  report),  a 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  63 

young  dental  practitioner,  extracted  a  third  molar  for  a  pa- 
tient. The  teeth  were  crowded,  and  the  one  extracted  was 
impacted.  Previous  to  the  extraction  of  this  tooth,  it  is  be- 
lieved that  the  maxillary  bone  was  to  some  extent  necrosed. 
In  removing  the  tooth,  the  surrounding  tissues  were  severely 
lacerated,  causing  inflammation  to  set  in  very  rapidly,  and 
necrosis  of  the  adjacent  bones  followed,  or,  if  it  was  present 
previously,  the  inflammation  was  the  direct  causal  of  the  sub- 
sequent increase  of  the  necrosis  of  the  bones  and  sloughing  of 
the  tissues.  The  physician  stated  to  the  patient  that  a  bone 
or  bones  adjacent  to  the  tooth  had  been  fractured  by  the  den- 
tist ;  and  in  view  of  this  and  other  facts,  legal  proceedings 
were  instituted  against  the  dentist,  charging  him  with  ignor- 
ant malpractice.  That  his  carelessness  and  unskillfulness  in 
not  properly  performing  the  operation,  and  the  unnecessary 
laceration  of  the  parts,  were  the  direct  causes  of  the  injury  to 
the  parts  and  subsequent  necrosis  of  the  bone.  For  these 
injuries,  loss  of  time,  suffering,  etc.,  occasioned  the  plaintiff', 
damages  were  demanded. 

The  defendant  compromised  with  the  plaintiff,  paying 
$300,  before  the  case  was  given  to  the  jury,  and  it  was  with- 
drawn.* 

In  the  case  of  Wm.  Joice  v.  E.  P.  Howland  and  S.  T. 
Mason,  (The  Howland  Dental  Association),  tried  before 
Judge  McArthur,  in  Washington  City,  the  defendants  were 
charged  with  injury  to  the  plaintiff 's  jaw,  due  to  carelessness 
and  neodio-ence  in  the  extraction  of  the  latter's  teeth.  The 
jury  rendered  a  verdict  of  $250  damages  for  the  plaintiff. 

In  1869,  an  action  was  brought  against  Messrs.  Gabriel, 
in  Liverpool,  by  a  mate  in  the  mercantile  marine  service. 
The  plaintiff  charged  that  the  assistant,  in  extracting  a  tooth, 
used  a  "  key,"  with  so  much  violence  and  want  of  skill  as  to 
break  the  jaw,  thereby  causing  dreadful  and  long  continued 
suffering,  and  loss  of  the  use  of  the  jaw.  It  appeared  that 
the  plaintiff  had  not  complained  for  seventeen  weeks,  and 
had  only  within  a  week  or  two  consulted  the  services  of  a 
surgeon,  who  was  not  called  as  a  witness. 

♦Case  reported  to  the  author  by  I'rof.  C.  N.  I'eirce. 


64  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

Mr.  Gabriel  and  bis  assistants  denied  the  charges,  and 
also  that  a  "key"  was  used  in  extracting  the  tooth.  Two 
medical  witnesses  were  called,  who  said  that  they  believed 
from  the  appearance  of  the  jaw  that  it  was  partly  weakened 
and  broken  away  by  disease.  The  jnry  found  for  the  plain- 
tiff, damages  £100,  but  Mr.  Justice  Lush,  who  tried  the  case, 
was  dissatisfied  with  the  verdict,  and  an  application  for  a 
new  trial  was  granted.     (British  Journal.) 

In  the  case  of  Flora  Brooks  v.  Dr.  Hiram  Todd,  tried  in 
the  Common  Pleas  Court,  Columbus,  Ohio,  in  February, 
1879,  the  plaintiff  charged  that  Dr.  Todd,  after  repeated 
efforts  to  extract  a  crowded  wisdom  tooth,  injured  the  jaw- 
bone and  surrounding  tissues,  causing  swelling  and  inflam- 
mation ;  and  that  she  was  unable  to  open  her  mouth  for  three 
months.  Later,  spiculse  of  bone  exfoliated,  an  abscess  formed, 
and  discharged  underneath  the  chin,  etc.  The  jury  rendered 
a  verdict  of  $2,000  damages  for  the  plaintiff. 

Many  suits  of  a  similar  nature  have  been  brought  un- 
justly against  dentists  by  men  and  women  of  doubtful  char- 
acter. In  a  majority  of  them  the  dentists  have  thought 
it  wise  to  settle  the  cases  out  of  court  on  the  best  terms  they 
could  arrange,  rather  than  suffer  the  loss  of  time,  annoyance 
and  expense  incident  to  the  defense  of  a  suit  of  this  nature. 

§  26.       COCAINE    POISONING. 

The  introduction  of  cocaine  in  surgery,  to  produce  local 
anaesthesia,  has  probably  provoked  more  discussion  in  the 
medical  and  dental  professions  than  any  single  drug. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  the  authorities  of  the  United 
States  and  abroad  are  divided  as  regards  to  its  merits. 
Some,  who  are  its  most  enthusiastic  adherents,  proclaim  that 
cocaine  is  a  uniformly  successful  local  anaesthetic  if  properly 
administered,  while  others  have  discarded  it  as  being  unre- 
liable and  valueless.  Its  toxic  effects,  from  a  legal  point  of 
view,  claim  attention.  Although  many  persons  experience 
no  unpleasant  results  from  the  injection  of  cocaine  into  the 
gums,  still  in  others  alarming  symptoms  are  produced.  Syn- 
cope, extreme  respiratory  distress,  feeling  of  complete  pros- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  65 

tration,  lasting  for  hours;  vomiting,  great  nausea,  facia- 
paralysis,  muscular  paresis,  and  swelling  of  the  tongue  may 
ensue. 

Acute  symptoms  of  poisoning  cause  muscular  spasms, 
and  in  consequence  a  marked  elevation  of  the  temperature. 
Death  appears  to  result  from  asphyxia,  caused  by  respira- 
tory paralysis,  the  heart  continuing  to  beat  after  respiration 
ceases.  There  are,  according  to  Dr.  Pruyn,  two  effects  pro- 
duced by  cocaine.  First,  the  physiological,  which  is  caused 
by  small  doses,  producing  hyperesthesia,  dilation  of  the 
pupil,  loquacity,  intoxication,  with  a  peculiar  feeling  of 
restfulness.  Following  this  comes  the  second  stage  or  effect, 
the  toxicological  effects.  It  is  impossible  to  recognize  where 
one  beo-ins  and  the  other  ends. 

Dr.  Arthur  Hugenschmidt  divides  accidents  from  cocaine 
into  two  clases,  local  and  general. 

Local  accidents  (molecular  necrosis  of  the  tissues,  or 
necrosis  of  the  alveolus)  can  be  prevented  by  washing  with 
an  antiseptic  solution  (bichloride  of  mercury  tsW)- 

General  accidents  are  the  toxic  effects,  cardiac  and  pul- 
monary symptoms  previously  described. 

Dr.  Ottolengui  (Cosmos,  February,  1889)  calls  attention 
to  toxic  effects  and  dangers  of  cocaine,  and  cites  many  indi- 
vidual cases  thereof.  Numerous  deaths  have  been  recorded 
due  to  the  use  of  cocaine. 

Because  of  the  unstability  of  the  effects,  the  fatal  dose 
is  variable.  As  high  as  eight  grains  has  been  taken  inter- 
nally without  producing  death,  while  a  two  per  cent,  solu- 
tion (containing  three-quarters  of  a  grain)  has  caused  fatal 
results. 

Because  of  the  dangerous,  injurious,  and  even  fatal 
results  of  the  drug,  the  legal  liabilities  incident  to  its  admin- 
istration are  deemed  worthy  of  consideration.  A  dentist  has 
been  sued  for  ten  thousand  dollars  for  injuries  sustained  by 
injection  of  cocaine.  The  following  is  an  abbreviated  report 
of  the  case,  West  v.  Maloney,  (New  Orleans  Court),  quoted  by 
Dr.  Ottolengui,  viz.:  "The  petitioners  allege  that  George 
P.  Maloney,  who  is  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dental  sur- 


66  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

gery,  is  justly  indebted  to  them  in  the  sum  of  ten  thousand 
dollars.  That  on  the  29th  day  of  August,  1888,  one  Paul- 
ine West  went  into  the  office  of  said  G.  P.  Maloney  to 
have  a  tooth  extracted.  That  in  order  to  do  it  without 
pain,  as  said  Maloney  said  he  could  and  would  do,  he 
administered  to  her  hypodermic  injections  of  cocaine,  a 
very  powerful  and  dangerous  drug,  and  in  so  large  a  quan- 
tity that  instantly  the  said  Pauline  West  was  paralyzed 
to  such  an  extent  that  when  she  attempted  to  leave  ih»- 
chair,  she  fell  to  the  floor,  and  for  several  hours  remained 
in  that  condition,  being  unable  to  stand.  Petitioners  further 
allege  that  they  believe  Mrs.  West's  system  is  permanently 
injured  by  the  dangerous  drug,  and  her  health  injured  through 
the  carelessness,  imprudence,  and  want  of  skill  of  Dr. 
Maloney." 

The  statement  of  Dr.  Maloney  is,  as  follows:  "The 
lady  declared  she  wished  cocaine  administered,  saying  she 
had  had  the  drug  administered  previously.  She  also  stated 
that  she  was  keenly  sensible  to  its  effects,  the  last  operation 
having  rendered  her  ill  nearly  three  weeks.  With  these 
facts  as  a  guide  Dr.  Maloney  proceeded  to  inject  a  small  quan- 
tity of  a  weak  solution — two  per  cent. — in  the  gums.  The 
lady  demanded  that  more  of  the  drug  be  used  as  the  gums 
still  ached,  and  when  the  doctor  demurred  got  up  from  the 
chair,  the  tooth  not  having  been  extracted.  At  this  time 
she  stated  that  she  felt  ill.  A  moment  later,  after  she  had 
passed  out  of  the  office  into  the  hall,  the  doctor  was  startled 
to  hear  a  piercing  scream  come  from  that  direction,  and 
hastily  going  to  the  spot  found  that  the  lady  had  fallen 
unconscious." 

This  case  against  Dr.  Maloney  was  thrown  out  of  the 
eourt  upon  a  technical  error,  because  the  suit  was  instituted 
by  Mrs.  West  herself,  whereas,  she  should  have  been  author- 
ized by  her  husband  to  do  so.  This  suit  has  never  been 
decided. 

In  cases  of  alleged  malpractice  of  the  nature  citedabove, 
it  is  impossible  to  lay  down  a  general  rule,  the  neglect  of 
which  would  constitute  malpractice  ;  but  the  presumption  is 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  67 

that  the  rules  of  general  malpractice  are  applicable  thereto. 
The  difficult}'  of  decision  is  increased  because  of  the  unstable 
action  of  the  drug. 

Whereas  it  would  have  no  constitutional  effects  upon  one 
person,  the  same  dose,  upon  another,  would  cause  alarming 
symptoms,  thus  demonstrating  that  the  toxic  effect  of  the 
drug  is  dependent  upon  the  temperament — the  idiosyncra- 
sies— of  the  person. 

As  cocaine  is  a  death-dealing  drug,  he  who  seeks  to  ad- 
minister it  must  possess  a  fair  working  knowledge  of  it  in 
all  its  phases,  and  should  adopt  and  practice  the  modes  of 
administration  advocated  by  the  leading  authorities  on  the 
subject. 

A  compilation  and  resume  of  the  rules  to  be  cautiously 
observed  in  its  administration  are,  as  follows  :  "  To  avoid 
patients  who  are  nervous  and  hysterical — those  who  have  any 
dread  of  the  approaching  operation.  Select  those  of  a  san- 
guine temperament  and  in  good  health.  Do  not  give  cocaine 
to  a  pregnant  woman.  Before  inserting  the  hypodermic 
needle,  pass  over  the  part  to  be  punctured  a  piece  of  cotton 
dipped  in  bichloride  solution,  1  to  1000.  These  antiseptic 
precautions  must  be  taken  to  lessen  the  danger  of  local  ac- 
cidents, such  as  have  been  previously  described." 

The  dose  varies  from  one-sixth  to  one-half  grain — a 
larger  dose  is  considered  unsafe.  Never  use  the  drug  unless 
restoratives — brandy,  aromatic  spirits  of  ammonia,  nitrate  of 
amyl — are  conveniently  at  hand. 

Legally,  the  above  requirements  must  be  observed  by 
the  dental  surgeon  who  administers  cocaine.  As  the  cir- 
cumstances are  variable,  each  case  must  be  its  own  criterion, 
and  is  decided  by  the  jury  according  to  the  evidence. 

A  case  of  death  from  poisoning  by  cocaine,  and  the  legal 
prosecution  of  the  dentist  who  administered  the  drug,  is  re- 
ported by  Dr.  H.  J.  Hanvood  as  having  occurred  in  France. 
The  following  extract  is  taken  from  the  Petit  Journal,  of 
Paris,  August  11th,  1890 :  "  It  is  acknowledged  to-day  that 
Jeanne  Delcambre,  whose  mysterious  death  occurred  at  a 
dentist's  office  recently,  was  poisoned  by  cocaine.     The  post- 


68  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

mortem  examination  was  made  yesterday,  and  Dr.  Dutillent 
attributed  the  death  to  the  administration  of  cocaine  to  a 
nervous  person." 

As  sequel  to  the  above,  is  this  comment  in  a  Lyons  pa- 
per (Le  Nouvelliste  de  Lyon),  October  27th,  1890  :  "  If  the 
effects  of  cocaine  are  generally  successful,  the  results  are  some- 
Times  greatly  to  be  regretted,  because  it  occasionally  produces 
anaesthesia  so  well  that  the  patient  falls  into  a  fainting  fit,  and 
wakes  no  more.  In  such  an  event,  ought  the  dentist  be 
held  responsible  for  the  death  of  his  patient  ?  Such  a  ques- 
tion has  recently  been  placed  before  the  Court  of  Lille,  and 
the  judges  decided  in  the  negative.  The  dentist  in  ques- 
tion  was  one  B ,  charged  with   causing  the  death   of 

Mile.  Delcambre,  who  died  immediately  after  the  extraction 
of  a  tooth,  several  injections  of  cocaine  having  previously 
been  administered.  He  was  charged  with  homicide  par  im- 
prudence. The  verdict  stated  that  the  girl  succumbed  dur- 
ing syncope.  That  it  has  not  been  proven  that  the  use  of  a 
small  dose  of  cocaine  had  caused  death,  but  that  death  was 
very  probably  the  result  either  of  shock  caused  by  the  ex- 
traction, or  by  reason  of  the  nervous  temperament,  or  anaemia 

of  the  young  person.     But  B was  fined  fifteen  francs  for 

illegal  practice  of  medicine." 

"  Whereas,  in  administering  on  the  8th  of  August  last 
injections  of  cocaine  on  the  person  of  Jeanne  Delcambre,  and 
not  possessing  a  diploma,  he  has  infringed  the  law  of  An. 
XI,  concerning  the  practice  of  medicine,  that,  in  reality,  co- 
caine is  an  anaesthetic  demanding  much  prudence,  and  may 
only  be  employed  by  medical  doctors."  (Items  of  Interest, 
February,  1891.) 

This  decision  shows  the  status  of  the  dentist  in  France, 
respecting  the  administration  of  anaesthetics,  viz. :  that "  none 
but  qualified  practitioners  of  medicine  are  by  law  allowed 
to  employ  an  anaesthetic  whose  administration  involves  great 
risk  of  life."  And  this  verdict,  furthermore,  sustains  the 
author's  views,  that  cocaine  should  be  regarded  in  the  same 
light  as  other  anaesthetics  which  are  given  systemically,  and 
obviously  the  same  legal  rules  regulating  the  administration 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  69 

of  anaesthetics,  would  apply  to  cocaine  when  administered  as 
an  anaesthetic. 

§  27.       INJURIES    AND    DEATHS    DUE    TO    ANESTHESIA. 

The  greatest  number  and  most  serious  cases  of  malprac- 
tice in  dentistry  have  resulted  from  injuries  and  deaths 
alleged  to  be  due  to  the  improper  administration  of  an 
anaesthetic. 

Both  civil  and  criminal  suits  have  been  instituted  in  the 
prosecution  of  these  cases ;  the  former,  for  injuries  to  the 
health,  the  direct  causal  being  charged  to  the  administration 
of  an  impure  anaesthetic,  or  negligence  in  its  employment ; 
the  latter,  for  deaths  caused  by  carelessness,  neglect,  or 
want  of  skill  in  its  administration. 

The  use  of  an  anaesthetic  is  attended  with  an  appre- 
ciable risk  ;  the  life  of  the  patient  is  endangered  thereby, 
and  no  care,  no  matter  how  great,  will  prevent  an  occasional 
death.  The  cause  of  the  fatality  may  be  due  to  the  exist- 
ence of  some  organic  trouble,  which  was  undiscovered  by 
the  operator,  although  he  endeavored,  previous  to  the  ad- 
ministration, by  his  own  or  a  physician's  examination,  to  as- 
certain whether  the  patient  suffered  from  any  such  diseases. 

Civil  suits,  where  the  alleged  injuries  to  the  health  are 
attributable  to  the  neglect  or  want  of  skill  of  the  dental  sur- 
geon, the  court  views  in  the  same  legal  light  as  cases  of  "  or- 
dinary malpractice,  where  physical  injuries  are  alleged." 
The  same  questions  of  "  ordinary  skill  "  and  negligence  arise 
to  which  the  doctrines  heretofore  presented  are  applica- 
ble. The  general  legal  rule,  as  stated,  requires  of  the  dental 
surgeon  who  presumes  to  use  an  anaesthetic,  that  he  thoroughly 
understand  its  physiological  effects,  the  mode  of.  adminis- 
tration in  all  its  phases,  and  the  practical  details  of  its  em- 
ployment. 

"  Before  he  is  justified  in  administering  the  anaesthetic, 
the  operator  must  ascertain  and  consider  numerous  facts  as, 
Does  the  operation  demand  anaesthesia?  Does  it  require 
prolonged  anaesthesia,  or,  will  nitrous  oxide  gas  suffice? 
W'liat  is  the  condition  of  the  patient?     Has  he  any  signs  of 


70  DENT  \1,     .11  RISPR1  l>l'.X<i:. 

faulty  circulation  ?  Is  lie  in  condition  for  anaesthesia  '.'  "  (Gar- 
rison on  Dental  Juris.,  Amer.  Sys.  Dent.,  Vol.  III.,  p.  058.) 

In  all  cases  the  patient  should  be  subjected  to  a  careful 
physical  examination  before  the  inhalation  of  the  anaesthetic, 
because  there  are  a  few  conditions  which  absolutely  inter- 
dict the  use  of  an  anaesthetic,  which,  if  known,  would  make 
obligatory  upon  the  operator  the  exercise  of  more  than  a 
usual  amount  of  care.  He  must  possess  and  practically  use 
all  the  latest  knowledge  of  modern  times  and  that  advocated 
by  leading  authorities  on  the  subject.  The  requirements 
just  cited  are  held  to  constitute  only  "  the  ordinary  skill  " 
required  by  the  law  of  him  who  resorts  to  the  use  of  anaes- 
thetics, because  their  administration  involves  great  risk  of 
life ;  consequently,  it  demands  a  peculiar  degree  of  vigilance 
and  sagacity,  sometimes  called  "  the  utmost  care." 

Because  the  administration  of  nitrous  oxide  gas  to  a 
person  is  comparatively  safe,  the  law  is  somewhat  lax  as  to 
the  requirements  of  the  examination  of  a  patient  previous  to 
its  administration.  However,  as  stated,  the  dentist  should 
have  a  physician  make  such  examination,  or  do  so  himself, 
if  capable,  as  a  safeguard.  There  is  a  possibility,  in  such 
cases,  of  the  jury  mulcting  the  dentist  who  neglects  these 
precautions.  When  the  dentist  presumes  to  administer 
ether  or  chloroform,  a  thorough  physical  examination  of  the 
patient  is  absolutely  necessary. 

Ignorant  malpractice  is  a  significant  factor  in  these  cases. 
If  the  operator  does  not  possess  the  requisite  "  ordinary 
skill,"  which,  as  stated,  constitutes  a  thorough  knowledge  of 
the  subject,  he  is  responsible,  no  matter  how  careful  he  may 
be,  if  unwonted  results  should  occur.  Thus,  one  unac- 
quainted with  the  correct  methods  of  administering  chloro- 
form, or  having  mistaken  views  in  regard  to  it,  should 
undertake  its  administration  and  fatal  results  occur,  the 
question  of  care  in  its  administration  would  be  set  aside  by 
the  court,  The  fact  that  he  did  not  possess  the  "  ordinary 
knowledge  and  skill,"  required  by  law,  would  be  sufficient 
to  convict  him  ;  whereas,  with  a  dental  surgeon,  skilful  and 
experienced  in   his  profession,  and  particularly  conversant 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  71 

with  the  administration  of  anaesthetics,  the  presumption,  in 
the  absence  of  proofs,  is  in  favor  of  his  skill  and  correctness 
of  administering  them.  Therefore,  to  sustain  the  charge  of 
malpractice,  negligence  must  be  proven.  The  leading  case 
on  the  points  brought  forward,  is  that  of  Bogle  v.  Winslow, 
5  Phila.,  136  :- — A  driver  was  thrown  from  his  car,  his  head 
striking  a  tree-box  as  he  fell.  lie  was  picked  up  insensible, 
but  recovered,  and  was  able  to  return  to  work  the  next  day. 
Afterwards,  he  went  to  Dr.  Winslow's  office  for  the  purpose 
of  having  teeth  extracted,  under  the  influence  of  chloroform. 
The  chloroform  was  administered,  and  not  long  afterwards 
he  was  struck  with  partial  paralysis,  and  the  question  at 
issue  in  the  court  was,  whether  this  was  attributable  to  the 
neglect  of  Dr.  Winslow. 

In  his  charge  to  the  jury,  Judge  Hare  said: — "The 
defendant  is  not  answerable,  unless  two  things  appear : 
First,  that  he  was  guilty  of  negligence,  or  want  of  skill  in 
administering  the  chloroform ;  and  second,  that  the  disease 
which  followed  was  the  result  of  the  use  of  this  remedy. 

"  On  the  first  point  it  has  been  well  said  that  the  negli- 
gence must  consist  either  in  the  unfitness  of  the  remedy 
itself,  or  its  unskillful  application.  The  highest  medical 
evidence  has  been  brought  to  bear  on  that  point,  and  a  num- 
ber of  surgeons  examined,  who  all,  with  one  exception,  testi- 
fied that  chloroform  is  an  acceptable  and  proper  agent  even  in 
minor  surgery,  sanctioned  by  science  and  experience. 

"  The  evidence  shows  also  that  the  defendant  is  skillful 
in  his  profession,  and  especially  conversant  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  chloroform,  being  called  upon  by  eminent  surgeons 
to  give  it  for  them.  This,  in  the  absence  of  proof,  affords  a 
presumption  in  favor  of  his  skill  in  the  particular  instance 
in  question.  There  is  nothing  from  which  malpractice  can 
be  inferred,  except  the  length  of  time  during  which  it  was 
used,  and  the  quantity  made  use  of,  the  time  being  longer, 
and  the  quantity  given  greater,  than  is  ordinarily  necessary  to 
produce  the  effect;  but  the  scientific  men  who  have  been  ex- 
amined, have  declared  that  the  amount  of  the  dose  and  the 
prolongation  of  its  influence,  are  not  productive  of  danger, 


7l^  DENTAL  JURISPRl  DENCE. 

unless  there  is  a  want  of  proper  care.  Teal  imony  of  this  aort 
ought  to  have  great  weight  with  the  jury  and  be  decisive, 
unless  there  is  something  to  overthrow  its  force.  We  know 
nothing  of  the  effects  of  the  agents  of  this  description,  excepl 
from  experience,  and  the  records  of  that  experience  ar< 
be  found  in  scientific  works,  and  the  evidence  of  men  who 
have  made  the  Bubject  a  study.  The  jury  are,  however,  to- 
decide  in  the  lasl  resort;  but  even  if  they  doubt  the  safety 
of  the  agent  employed,  there  is  still  a  consideration  of  the 
highest  reason  which  they  ought  not  to  disregard.  All 
science  is  the  result  of  a  vovage  of  exploration,  and  the 
science  of  medicine  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  yet  readied 
the  shore.  Men  must  be  guided,  therefore,  by  what  is  prob- 
ably true,  and  not  made  responsible  for  their  ignorance  of  the 
absolute  truth  which  is  not  known.  If  a  medical  practi- 
tioner resorts  to  the  acknowledged  proper  sources  of  informa- 
tion ;  if  he  sits  at  the  feet  of  masters  of  high  reputation,  and 
does  as  they  have  taught  him,  he  has  done  his  duty,  and 
should  not  be  made  answerable  for  the  evils  that  may  result 
from  errors  in  the  instruction  which  he  has  received.  Medi- 
cal opinion  varies  from  time  to  time.  What  is  taught  at. 
one  period  may  be  discovered  to  be  erroneous  at  another,  but 
he  who  acts  according  to  the  best  known  authority,  is  a 
skillful  practitioner,  although  that  authority  should  lead  him, 
in  some  respects,  wrong.  He  will  then  have  done  all  that  he 
can,  all  that  is  given  to  man  to  do,  and  may  leave  the  result, 
without  self-reproach,  in  the  hands  of  a  higher  power.  If, 
however,  you  should  decide  that  chloroform  was  an  improper 
agent,  or  that  it  was  erroneously  administered  in  this  in- 
stance, you  Avill  then  have  to  consider  whether  the  paralysis 
was  the  result  of  its  administration.  Scientific  evidence  has 
been  adduced  on  this  point  also,  to  show  that  paralysis  is 
not  a  natural,  or  even  a  possible,  consequence  from  giving 
chloroform." 

The  learned  judge,  alter  reviewing  the  testimony  on  this 
point,  said:  "  This  topic  is  not  irrelevant,  because  the  medi- 
cal testimony  here  is,  that  the  severe  blow  on  the  head 
received  by  the  plaintiff  might  have  produced  a  latent  dis- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  73 

ease,  only  requiring  some  exciting  cause  to  rouse  it  into 
activity.  If  the  plaintiff  was,  from  previous  circumstances, 
predisposed  to  paralysis,  it  might  well  happen  that  the  ex- 
traction of  his  teeth  without  the  chloroform,  or  the  use  of 
chloroform  without  the  extraction,  would  bring  on  a  para- 
lytic attack.  Even  if  this  was  the  case,  still  .it  would  not  he 
just  to  make  the  defendant  answerable  for  the  consequences 
which  he  could  not  foresee,  which  were  not  the  ordinary  or 
probable  result  of  what  he  did.  He  was  only  bound  to  look 
to  what  was  natural,  and  probably  to  what  might  reasonably 
be  anticipated.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that  he  was 
acquainted  with  the  accident  that  had  befallen  the  plaintiff, 
or  had  any  reason  to  suppose  that  there  was  greater  danger 
in  his  case  than  in  that  of  other  men.  Unless  such  guard  is 
thrown  around  the  physician,  his  judgment  may  be  clouded 
or  his  confidence  shaken  by  the  dread  of  responsibility  at 
those  critical  moments  when  it  is  all-important  that  he 
should  retain  the  free  and  undisturbed  enjoyment  of  his 
faculties,  in  order  to  use  them  for  the  benefit  of  the  patient." 

The  jury  rendered  a  verdict  for  the  defendant. 

Shock  to  the  nervous  system  and  incomplete  anaesthesia 
are  important  factors  in  producing  death  from  anaesthesia. 
The  operations  upon  the  teeth  and  associated  tissues  are 
sometimes  excruciating  and  dangerously  painful  in  character. 
It  is  an  accredited  fact  that  death  or  serious  injury  may  fol- 
low such  operations,  in  consequence  of  the  reflex  impressions 
made  through  the  fifth  nerve  upon  a  vital  ganglia. 

Dr.  Lauder  Brinton,  in  Coleman's  Dental  Surgery  and 
Pathology  (cited  by  Dr.  Litch),  gives  the  following  explana- 
tion of  the  nervous  mechanism  through  which  irritation  of 
the  fifth  nerve  during  tooth  extraction  operates  upon  the 
vascular  Bystem  :  The  blood,  when  it  reaches  the  veins,  is 
useless  for  the  nutrition  of  the  tissues,  as  we  see  in  a  corpse 
when  the  whole  of  the  blood  in  the  body  is  contained  in  the 
veins,  the  arteries  being  empty ;  only  so  long  as  it  is  in  the 
arteries  can  it  maintain  the  vitality  of  the  tissues.  The 
blood  is  kept  in  the  arteries,  first,  by  fresh  supplies 
being  pumped  out  of  the  venous  system  into  the  arterial   by 


74  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

the  heart;  secondly,  by  the  contraction  of  the  arterioles, 
which  prevent  its  running-  hack  too  quickly  into  the  veins. 
When  a  tooth  is  drawn  without  chloroform,  the  irritation 
is  carried  by  the  fifth  nerve  to  the  nerve  centers. 

The  irritation  of  the  vagus  may  depress  or  arrest  the 
heart's  action,  so  that  no  blood  is  sent  into  the  arterial  svs- 
tem  for  several  seconds;  but  this  is  counterbalanced  by  the 
irritation  of  the  vaso-motor  centers,  which  causes  the  con- 
traction of  the  arterioles,  and  thus  correspondingly  dimin- 
ishes the  outflow.  In  a  person  thoroughly  under  chloroform, 
both  nerve  centers  have  their  reflex  sensibility  abolished,  and 
so  the  irritation  has  no  effect  upon  either;  hut  with  partial 
anaesthesia,  the  vaso-motor  center  may  be  rendered  insensible 
before  the  vagus  center,  and  consequentl}',  when  irritation  is 
applied  to  the  fifth  nerve,  the  vagus  center  only  is  excited, 
the  heart  is  depressed  or  stopped,  and  the  inflow  of  blood 
into  the  arterial  system  is  diminished  or  arrested,  while 
there  is  no  contraction  of  the  arterioles,  and,  therefore,  no 
corresponding  diminution  of  the  outflow.  The  arterial  sys- 
tem, therefore,  becomes  more  or  less  empty,  i.  e.,  it  ap- 
proaches, more  or  less,  the  condition  of  death,  and  fatal 
syncope  may  result. 

Many  deaths  have  occurred  from  the  use  of  anaesthetics 
for  minor  operations,  notably  for  the  extraction  of  teeth,  in 
which  but  a  partial  degree  of  insensibility  was  induced  ; 
hence  the  indications  are  to  have  the  patient  thoroughly 
under  anaesthesia  before  operating. 

The  legal  doctrine  requires  the  surgeon  who  presumes 
to  use  death-dealing  drugs,  such  as  anaesthetics  are,  not  only 
that  he  possess  the  requisite  ordinary  skill,  but  that  he 
will  also  observe  extraordinary  discretion  in  the  selection  of 
the  anaesthetic  to  be  employed,  that  he  will  use  the  one 
which  will  produce  the  desired  degree  of  anaesthesia  with 
the  minimum  amount  of  danger  to  the  patient. 

There  are  to-day  in  use  practically  only  three  anaesthet- 
ics— nitrous  oxide,  ether,  and  chloroform.  As  to  the  com- 
parative fatality  attending  their  use,  it  may  be  said  that 
nitrous  oxide  s;as  has  been  demonstrated  to  be  a  perfectly 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  75 

sate  anaesthetic.  Oat  of  many  millions  of  inhalations,  given 
to  health}-  and  diseased  alike,  sometimes  by  comparatively 
untrained  and  ignorant  dentists,  only  thirteen  deaths  are 
recorded. 

Ether  ranks  next  in  order  of  safety. 

Chloroform  kills,  says  Dr.  H.  C.  "Wood,  proportionately 
four  or  live  times  as  frequently  as  does  ether. 

Dr.  Litch  reports  that  in  three  hundred  and  thirty-five 
deaths  from  chloroform  collected  by  Prof.  Lyman,  there 
were  thirty-live  which  occurred  during  or  after  its  adminis- 
tration for  the  extraction  of  teeth.  This,  he  says,  is  more 
than  occurred  from  any  single  operation  except  the  removal 
of  tumors,  including  cancerous  breasts  and  tongues. 

Dr.  Turnbull  reports  during  the  decade  from  1869  to 
1879,  twelve  deaths  from  chloroform  given  for  the  extraction 
of  teeth. 

This  large  death-roll  would  undoubtedly  have  been 
enormously  increased  had  not  the  introduction  and  general 
use  in  dentistry  of  nitrous  oxide  gas,  at  this  period,  super- 
seded the  more  dangerous  anesthetics. 

Owing  to  this  large  mortality  from  chloroform,  and  the 
comparative  safety  of  nitrous  oxide  gas,  there  are  but  few 
who  dissent  from  the  general  opinion,  that  the  dental  sur- 
geon is  not  justified  in  putting  the  life  of  the  patient  to  the 
unnecessary  risk  of  chloroformization,  excepting,  perhaps, 
under  special  circumstances. 

In  Australia,  a  jury  and  judge  have  condemned  to  heavy 
penalty  a  chloroformist  who  lost  his  patient  from  anesthesia. 

Even  now  cases  of  death  from  chloroform  are  occasion- 
ally reported.  (See  Amer.  System  Dent.,  Vol.  1,  136.)  Re- 
garding the  causes  that  contribute  towards  death  from 
anaesthesia,  Dr.  Litch  makes  the  following  deserved  comment : 
"  That  chloroform,  as  well  as  other  anaesthetics,  is  often  igno- 
rantly  given  by  incompetent  persons,  and  that  many  cases  of 
fatality  arc  attributable  to  this  cause  rather  than  to  inherent 
vices  in  the  agent  itself,  is  unquestionable.  Case  after  case 
may  be  quoted  in  which  every  condition  necessary  to  the  safe 
induction  of  the  anesthetic  state  with  either  chloroform  or 


76  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

ether  has  been  systematically  violated,  and  in  a  great  meas- 
ure the  responsibility  for  such  a  state  of  things  must  rest 
upon  the  lax  public  sentiment,  which,  until  a  recent  period, 
has  made  it  possible  for  even  the  most  ignorant  or  incompe- 
tent to  practice  either  medicine  or  dentistry  in  any  State  in 
the  Union. 

"  Xo  small  share  of  blame,  however,  must  be  attached  to 
the  school  of  instruction.  The  subject  of  anaesthesia  and 
anaesthetics  has  been  too  often  treated  as  a  matter  of  trivial 
importance,  to  be  dismissed  in  a  single  lecture  or  less. 

"  Even  now  there  are  not  many  medical  or  dental  col- 
leges in  which  full  and  detailed  instructions  in  the  physio- 
logical or  pathological  relations  of  artificial  anaesthesia  are 
given  and  practically  enforced,  both  in  the  details  of  the  ad- 
ministration of  anaesthetic  agents  and  the  institution  of  re- 
suscitative  measures  when  such  are  required." 

Many  eminent  authorities  assert  that  the  inhalation  of 
nitrous  oxide  gas  is  frequently  attended  with  serious  and 
even  injurious  results  to  the  health  of  the  patient.  Numer- 
ous cases  in  evidence  thereof  are  cited  byDrs.  Darby,  Litch 
and  others.     Dr.  Darby  reports  three  cases: 

One,  of  a  lady,  who  attributed  all  her  ill-health  to 
this  agent,  she  never  having  enjoyed  perfect  health  after  she 
took  the  gas  for  the  purpose  of  having  teeth  extracted. 

Several  cases  are  also  quoted  by  Dr.  Litch,  the  most  nota- 
ble being  that  of  Dr.  K ,  a  Philadelphia  surgeon,  who 

died  of  diabetes,  which  the  indications  and  evidence  showed 
was  induced  by  the  inhalation  of  nitrous  oxide  gas.  Dr. 
Lafont  reports  cases  in  which  sugar  appeared  in  the  urine 
after  the  inhalation  of  nitrous  oxide  gas. 

It  is  difficult  in  these  cases  to  establish  a  causitive  rela- 
tion between  the  anaesthetic  agent  and  the  disease,  because  of 
the  unsatisfactory  data,  and  symptoms  produced  connecting 
them. 

From  a  legal  point  of  view,  for  the  results  of  these  injur- 
ies, co-incident  to  the  inhalation  of  nitrous  oxide  gas,  the 
dentist  who  administers  the  anaesthetic,  cannot  be  held  lia- 
ble, when  ignorance  and  incompetency  are  not  established. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  77 

The  dental  surgeon  is  not  responsible,  merely  because  he  has 
encountered  a  state  of  things  beyond  his  skill  to  remedy  or 
prevent.  These  cases  are  not  reflections  upon  his  skill,  but 
belong  to  the  category  of  natural  and  unforseen  consecpiences. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  if  neglect  or  want  of  skill  can  be 
proven,  he  would  be  answerable,  the  same  as  when  mechan- 
ical injuries  are  alleged. 

Thirteen  deaths  following  the  inhalation  of  nitrous 
oxide  gas  have  been  recorded.  In  judging  of  the  dangers  of 
this  anaesthetic,  six  of  these  cases  should  be  ruled  out,  as  the 
circumstances  and  evidence  proved  that  death  was  not  attrib- 
utable to  the  gas.  In  view  of  the  many  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  persons  to  whom  it  has  been  administered  since  its  general 
introduction,  this  exceedingly  small  percentage  of  fatal  cases 
undoubtedly  demonstrates  the  comparative  safety  of  nitrous 
oxide  gas. 

Eleven  of  these  cases  are  fully  reported  by  Dr.  Litch  in 
the  American  System  of  Dentistry,  Vol.  Ill,  186-193  ;  there- 
fore, a  report  of  but  one  of  these  is  given. 

This  case  occurred  in  November,  1884,  in  the  office  of 
M.  Duchesne,  a  dentist,  practicing  in  Paris.  In  this  case 
the  dentist  was  prosecuted,  and  the  annexed  report  of  the 
legal  proceeding  is  of  additional  interest,  as  showing  the  legal 
status,  in  France,  of  dentists  who  do  not  hold  the  degree  of 
doctor  of  medicine. 

Tribunal  Correctionnelle  de  la  Seine,  8e  Chambre,  presidence 
de  M.  Mersier,  audience  du  27  Novembre,  1885. 

"  Homicide  caused  by  the  imprudence  of  M.  Duchesne, 
dentist,  death  of  patient  by  asphyxia,  Law  of  Ventose,  Year 
XI,  Major  Surgical  Operations.     Decision  of  the  tribunal : 

"At  the  hearing  of  this  day  the  judge  gave  this  case  the 
following  opinion : 

"Whereas,  the  result  of  the  testimony  and  discussions  is, 
that  on  November  25th,  1884,  Monsieur  Lejeune  went  to  the 
office  of  Duchesne  to  have  a  tooth  extracted  ; 

"  That,  at  the  request  of  the  patient,  the  dentist  gave 
nitrous  oxide  in  order  to  render  the  patient  insensible  to  the 
operation  ; 


78  DENTAL    JURISPRUDEN<  E. 

"That,  as  a  result  of  these  inhalations,  M.  Lejeune  fell 
into  a  syncope,  which  was  followed  by  death  ; 

"Whereas,  in  this  operation  Duchesne  should  have  been 
assisted  by  a  doctor  of  medicine  ; 

"That  the  art  of  administering  nitrous  oxide  required 
that  the  operator  have  a  thorough  knowledge  of  physiology ; 
that  he  be  allowed  to  examine  beforehand  with  care  the  con- 
dition of  the  organs  of  the  patient  desiring  the  anaesthetic  ; 

"That,  whatever  the  experience  of  the  accused  may  be, 
experience  which  suffices  in  most  cases,  but  not  in  all,  this 
lack  of  special  knowledge  is  wanting  in  Duchesne,  who  i- 
neither  a  medical  doctor  nor  an  officer  of  health,  though  he 
assumes  the  qualification  of  the  doctor  of  medicine ; 

"That  a  thorough  medical  examination  of  M.  Lejeune 
was  very  necessary,  since  his  physician  knew  him  to  be  a 
man  who  could  not  inhale  any  anaesthetic  without  danger ; 

"  Whereas,  Duchesne  so  fully  realized  his  mistake  that, 
in  order  to  exculpate  himself,  he  hastened  to  assert,  contrary 
to  the  truth,  that  he  had  been  assisted  by  a  doctor  of  medi- 
cine ; 

"Whereas,  one  of  the  experts,' Dr.  Bronardel,  who  was 
heard  at  the  examination,  is  of  the  opinion  that  for  the  ap- 
plication of  an  anesthetic  two  competent  persons  are  neces- 
sary, of  whom  one  at  least  should  be  a  doctor  of  medicine, 
and  that  to  administer  an  anaesthetic  without  observing  these 
conditions  is  a  great  imprudence.  The  same  witness  testified, 
also,  that  in  this  particular  case  it  was  a  special  imprudent' 
to  give  nitrous  oxide  to  M.  Lejeune  in  view  of  his  constitu- 
tion ;  that,  if  it  had  been  a  question  of  an  operation  for  a 
grave  malady,  it  would  have  been  admissible  to  practice  on 
M.  Lejeune  this  mode  of  anaesthesia,  but  not  when,  to  quote 
the  language  of  the  witness,  it  was  given  out  of  complaisance 
and  to  spare  a  little  pain  in  a  trifling  operation ; 

"  Whereas,  on  the  other  hand,  among  surgical  opera- 
tions, the  extraction  of  a  tooth  must  be  generally  considered 
as  an  operation  without  any  importance,  and  one  which  re- 
quires chiefly  a  certain  dexterity  ;  that  any  dentist,  even  if  not 
a  graduate,  can  perform  the  operation  ;   but  when  the  act 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  79 

is  accompanied  by  the  administration  of  an  anaesthetic,  it  is 
not  the  same ; 

"  That,  in  this  last  case,  according  to  the  opinions  of  ex- 
perts, it  belongs  to  the  class  of  major  surgical  operations ; 

"  That,  as  a  conclusion  from  this,  by  the  terms  of  the 
Article  29  of  the  law  of  19  Ventose,  year  XI,  officers  of 
health  and,  for  greater  reasons,  dentists  who  are  not  grad- 
uates, have  not  the  right  to  give  an  anesthetic,  unless  under 
the  surveillance  and  inspection  of  a  doctor  of  medicine  ; 

"  That  such  an  operation  is  also  a  contravention  of  Ar- 
ticle 35  of  the  same  law,  which  prohibits  the  practice  of 
medicine  or  surgery  without  a  diploma  ; 

"  That  a  contravention  of  this  kind,  when  it  causes 
death  or  injuries,  becomes  one  of  the  elements  of  the  crime 
foreseen  by  Article  319,  Penal  Code,  which  is  exactly  the 
crime  attributed  to  M.  Duchesne  ; 

"  Whereas,  finally,  the  director  of  one  of  the  dental  col- 
leges of  Paris  does  not  hesitate  to  recognize  the  necessity  of 
the  attendance  of  a  physician,  when  it  is  necessary  for  a  den- 
tist to  administer  an  anaesthetic  ; 

"  Whereas,  from  the  circumstances  of  this  case,  the 
tribunal  has  no  doubt  that  the  mistake  of  Duchesne  caused 
the  death  of  Lejeune ; 

"  That  such  are  the  conclusions  of  the  experts,  which 
are  expressed  thus : 

"'We  must  consider  the  anaesthetic  as  having  caused 
death." 

"That  it  is  found  that  Duchesne  did,  in  November,  1884, 
in  Paris,  by  imprudence,  carelessness  and  neglect  of  rules,  com- 
mit an  involuntary  homicide  on  the  person  of  M.  Lejeune,  a 
crime  foreseen  and  punished  by  Article  319  of  the  Penal  Code  ; 

"  Whereas,  however,  there  exist  extenuating  circum- 
.-tances,  the  penalty  is  reduced  by  application  of  Article 
463,  in  that  which  concerns  the  indemnity  called  for  by  the 
civil  party  ; 

"  That,  whereas,  from  this  point  of  view,  the  court  must 
only  consider  the  material  damages  resulting  to  the  widow 
from  the  death  of  .\f.  Lejeune; 


80  DENTAL  JURISPR1  DENCE. 

"  Whereas,  if  this  fad  has  caused  the  business  affairs 
of  M.  Lejeune  to  be  retarded,  it  has  at  the  same  time  been  a 
source  of  benefit  to  his  family,  since  it  lias  caused  tbe  annual 
payments  of  the  policy  of  a  life  insurance,  which  M.  Lejeune 
regularly  paid  up,  t<>  cease,  and  that  the  policy  of  forty 
thousand  francs  has  been  paid  by  the  company  ; 

"That  we  must  also  consider  that  the  death  was  not 
only  due  to  the  fault  of  M.  Duchesne,  but,  also,  by  the  impru- 
dence of  the  victim  himself,  who  without  consulting  his  own 
physician,  or  without  having  any  medical  doctor  present, 
called  for  the  application  of  an  anaesthetic  ; 

"  That  this  imprudence  justifies  a  decree  of  abatement 
against  the  claim  of  the  prosecution  ; 

"That,  in  consideration  of  these  circumstances,  the  sum 
of  three  thousand  francs  is  sufficient  reparation  ;  Duchesne 
is  condemned  to  pay  six  hundred  francs  penalty  to  the  state, 
and  to  pay  to  the  widow  of  Lejeune  the  sum  of  three  thou- 
sand francs  damages.  The  prosecution  is  condemned  to  pay 
expenses,  except  the  fines  required  from  Duchesne."* 

The  administration  of  nitrous  oxide  gas  is  universally 
conceded  to  be  safe,  even  in  some  organic  diseases,  but,  as 
stated,  if  a  dentist  administers  the  same,  knowing  the  patient 
suffers  from  an  organic  disease,  which  a  careful  practitioner 
would  regard  as  interdicting  the  use  of  an  anaesthetic,  he 
would  be  liable  for  willful  malpractice,  if  unwonted  results 
or  injuries  be  caused  by  the  administration  of  the  same.  How- 
ever, if  the  dentist  states  to  the  patient  that  it  would  be 
dangerous  to  administer  the  anaesthetic,  and  declines  to  do 

*  The  author  will  not  presume  to  sit  in  judgment  in  this  case,  nor  to  criti- 
cise the  verdict  rendered,  as  I  believe  the  carelessness  of  the  dental  surgeon  in 
not  ascertaining  the  physical  condition  of  the  patient  previous  to  administering 
the  nitrous  oxide  gas,  when  in  doubt,  is  sufficient  to  render  him  criminally  liable 
for  the  results  of  his  negligence.  But  the  requirement  of  the  presence  of  a  doctor 
of  medicine  when  a  dental  surgeon  presumes  to  administer  nitrous  oxide  gas, 
is,  in  my  belief,  an  unjust  one,  and  not  requisite  according  to  the  acceptable 
legal  views  in  the  United  States.  It  is  supposed  that  deDtal  surgeons  in  gen- 
eral, have  a  thorough  knowledge  and  understanding  of  the  methods  of  admin- 
istering anaesthetics,  and  their  right  to  do  so  is  never  legally  questioned  ;  it  is 
their  personal  competency  and  ability  that  is  considered. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  81 

so,  be  would  not,  according  to  certain  decisions,  be  held 
responsible  for  adverse  results,  if  the  patient  assumes  the 
responsibility.  This  rule  is  laid  down  in  the  case  of  Gramme 
u.  Boerer,  24  Indiana  St.  (Ripley's),  795,  as  follows:— "It 
is  the  duty  of  the  surgeon  when  called  to  perform  an  opera- 
tion, to  advise  against  it,  if  he  thinks  it  unnecessary  or 
unreasonable.  But  if  he  advises  a  patient  of  mature  years 
and  sound  mind  that  the  operation  is  unnecessary  and 
improper,  and  the  patient  still  insists,  the  surgeon  cannot  be 
held  responsible  to  the  patient  for  damages  in  complying 
with  his  wishes,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  improper/' 

I  doubt  the  wisdom  and  legality  of  the  decision  in  the 
case  of  Gramme  v.  Boerer,  especially  in  reference  to  the  ad- 
ministration of  anaesthetics,  unless  there  were  reasonable  as- 
surances of  success,  otherwise  it  should  be  regarded  as  will- 
ful malpractice. 

The  dental  surgeon  may  have  humane  intentions  to  re- 
lieve the  patient's  sufferings,  but  he  should  not  be  excused 
from  the  charge  of  willful  malpractice,  when  he  knew  there 
was  reasonable  cause  to  suppose  that  the  anaesthetic  might 
produce  an  injury  or  cause  death.  The  inference  in  these 
cases  is,  that  the  administration  is  not  absolutely  necessary, 
that  the  life  of  the  patient  is  not  dependent  upon  its  use  in 
performing  the  operation.  The  law  holds  that  no  surgeon 
can  assume  to  perform  an  operation  or  act  which  may  en- 
danger human  life,  unless  the  life  of  the  patient  is  abso- 
lutely dependent  upon  the  operation  as  a  last  resort,  and  he 
would  be  held  criminally  responsible  for  the  results,  and  he 
is  not  excused  on  the  ground  of  good  intentions. 

"When  anaesthetics  are  administered  to  a  patient,  and  the 
operation  is  a  prolonged  one,  demanding  the  entire  attention 
of  the  operator,  so  much  so  that  he  is  incapable  of  noting 
the  effects  of  the  anaesthetic  and  the  condition  of  the  patient, 
the  law  demands  that  he  shall  have  the  assistance  of  one 
who  is  qualified  to  administer  an  anaesthetic. 

In  dentistry,  the  majority  of  the  operations  requiring 
anaesthesia  are  performed  in  a  comparatively  short  space  of 
time,  enabling   tbe   operator  to  give  his  attention   to   his 


v-  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

patient  aside  from  operating;  consequently,  the  legal  require- 
ment does  not  make  it  obligatory  for  the  dentist  to  have  the 
additional  services  of  an  assistant  or  attendant. 

£  28.       HEMORRHAGE  FOLLOWING  THE  EXTRACTION  OF  TEETH. 

It  frequently  occurs  that  a  severe  hemorrhage  results 
from  the  extraction  of  teeth.  The  consequent  loss  of  blood 
by  some  persons  is  greater  than  others,  owing  to  their  pre- 
disposition to  a  hemorrhagic  diathesis.  Several  deaths  re- 
sulting from  the  loss  of  blood  occasioned  by  hemorrhages  of 
this  character  are  recorded. 

One  case  that  is  recalled  to  the  author's  memory  occurred 
in  the  summer  of  1888,  at  Long  Branch.  Teeth  were  extracted 
for  a  patient  by  a  dentist  practicing  at  that  seaside  resort, 
and  at  the  time  there  was  but  slight  bleeding.  The  patient 
walked  a  number  of  miles,  living  outside  of  Long  Branch, 
but  before  reaching  home  a  severe  hemorrhage  commenced, 
which  could  not  be  checked,  and  the  patient  died  from  the 
loss  of  blood.  In  this  case,  the  dental  surgeon  could  not  be 
held  liable  for  the  fatality,  as  death  was  not  due  to  any  neg- 
ligence on  his  part. 

A  dentist's  duty  is  plain  in  the  treatment  of  cases  of  the 
nature  cited  above,  as  he  should  be  familiar  with  the  methods 
adopted,  and  styptica  employed  to  check  these  hemorrhages. 
No  liability  for  the  results  of  the  hemorrhage  can  be  charged 
to  the  dentist,  unless  for  negligence  in  not  properly  attending 
a  patient,  or  using,  the  proper  means  to  check  the  bleeding. 
lie  cannot  be  held  responsible,  because  he  encountered  circum- 
stances and  conditions,  natural  and  unforeseen  consequences, 
that  were  beyond  his  skill  to  remedy  or  prevent. 

The  case  of  Shaw  /•.  Evans,  X.  Y.  Sup.  Ct.,  can  be  quoted 
in  connection  with  the  above  statements.  This  case  was  a 
civil  suit  for  damages  for  injuries  consequent  upon  a  hemor- 
rhage following  tooth  extraction,  and  due  to  improper  treat- 
ment of  the  same.  (The  case  savors  of  the  nature  of  black- 
mail, and,  undoubtedly,  the  circumstances,  as  related,  prove 
that  it  was  an  unjust  prosecution,  and  that  a  great  wrong  was 
done  Dr.  Evans.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  83 

The  facts  of  the  case,  as  related  by  the  defendant,  Dr. 
Geo.  W.  Evans,  are,  as  follows :  "  The  plaintiff'  called  with 
her  sister  and  had  about  nine  or  ten  loose  teeth  extracted 
(badly  affected  with  pyorrhea  alveolaris)  about  half  past  three 
o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  bleeding  stopped  before  she 
left  the  office. 

"  At  half-past  seven  o'clock,  her  husband  called  while  I 
was  at  dinner,  and  waited  in  ray  office,  without  stating  what 
he  wanted,  until  I  was  finished,  about  eight  o'clock.  He, 
then,  when  I  came  up  stairs  and  saw  him,  stated  that  a 
'  slight  hemorrhage,'  as  he  described  it ;  commenced  about 
half-past  six  o'clock.  As  it  was  a  fine  evening  in  August,  I 
asked  him  to  bring  her  around  to  my  office,  instead  of  my 
going  to  his  house,  as  he  suggested.  He  consented,  and  I 
promised  to  wait  until  he  returned  with  her.  But  instead 
of  doing  as  he  promised,  he  went  after  his  family  physician. 
The  physician  was  out,  so  he  went  after  his  assistant.  He 
also  was  out,  or  out  of  town.  At  half-past  nine  he  sent  a 
woman,  whom  I  did  not  see,  to  my  door,  who  simply  said : 
'  Tell  Dr.  Evans  to  come  around  to  the  house,'  and  left  without 
seeing  me.  As  Shaw  lived  about  five  or  seven  minutes'  walk 
of  my  house,  I  sent  my  assistant  around  to  inquire  what  it 
meant,  and  why  they  acted  as  they  had,  as  I  thought  it 
rather  strange.  "While  my  assistant  was  gone,  I  got  my 
things,  a  few  instruments  and  styptics,  together,  to  be  ready 
the  instant  he  came  back.  I  do  not  think  I  lost  ten  minutes 
by  this  '  wait.'  When  my  assistant  returned,  and  I  heard  I 
was  wanted  at  the  house,  I  immediately  left  for  there,  with 
my  assistant  as  a  witness,  for  I  had  then  become  suspi- 
cious. The  reason  I  had  for  acting  thus  far  as  I  did,  was  be- 
cause I  did  not  like  the  appearance  of  the  parties,  nor  their  ac- 
tions either.  At  the  house  I  was  kept  waiting  in  the  parlor 
twenty  minutes,  before  I  was  admitted  to  the  patient's  room. 
The  room  was  very  dark,  no  gas  or  light  of  any  kind.  I 
asked  for  a  candle  or  lamp.  The  lamp  was  empty  of  oil. 
They  sent  out  and  obtained  some,  and,  finally,  in  about  fifteen 
minutes  more,  a  light  was  furnished.  I,  then,  found  the  bed 
covered   with   napkins  or  towels,  each  of  which  had  some 


84  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

bloody  spits  daubed  over  them  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make 
a  big  show.  I  looked  at  her  mouth  and  found  a  slight  hem- 
orrhage was  going  on  in  one  of  the  sockets.  I  plugged  it 
with  styptics,  and  stopped  the  hemorrhage  in  about  three 
minutes.     The  next  day  I  returned  and  removed  the  plug. 

"About  three  months  afterwards  I  received  a  letter 
from  a  lawyer,  demanding  me  to  pay  him  $200  damages  to 
his  client,  the  plaintiff  in  the  case,  and  patient  before  men- 
tioned. I  refused  to  do  so.  Plaintiff's  lawyer  then  gave  up 
the  case.  Sometime  afterwards  the  case  was  given  to  another 
lawyer.  He  also  interviewed  me,  and  would  have  probably 
settled  for  a  very  small  amount.  The  case  was  taken  out  of 
this  lawyer's  hands,  and  one  named  SSilverstone  was  en- 
gaged." 

Two  suits  were  brought  against  Dr.  Evans,  by  this  law- 
yer. One  for  the  husband  for  the  loss  of  his  wife's  services, 
— $2500  damages  claimed ;  the  other  by  the  wife,  "  for  neg- 
lect,"— damages,  also  $2500.  The  lawyer,  Mr.  Silverstone,  had 
another  one  to  join  him  in  prosecuting  the  suit. 

They  refused  to  give  a  bill  of  particulars  to  more  fully 
describe  the  charge  against  the  defendant.  The  court  or- 
dered them  to  do  so  ;  and,  upon  their  refusal,  they  were  fined. 
They  appealed  to  the  upper  court,  but  the  decision  of  the 
lower  court  was  affirmed.  They  were  ordered  to  more  fully 
answer,  and,  neglecting  to  do  so,  were  again  fined.  They 
once  more  appealed,  but  the  appeal  was  not  recognized.  As 
before,  they  did  not  quite  fully  answer,  and  again  were  fined. 
This  time  the  court  heard  them  (unjustly  going  against  their 
previous  record),  and,  on  a  "  per  curiam  "  order,  ordered  the 
the  case  to  go  on.  As  the  case  then  stood,  the  charge 
against  the  defendant  was,  "  that  he  carelessly,  negligently 
and  unskill fully  performed  the  operation,  and  that  the  hem- 
orrhage resulted  therefrom;  and  that  the  defendant,  when 
requested  by  the  plaintiff  to  discontinue  extracting  the 
teeth,  refused,  and  by  force  extracted  the  remaining  ones. 

"  That  the  shock,  incident  to  such  a  severe  operation,  in- 
jured her,  and  that  the  plaintiff  neglected  her  by  not  attend- 
in  o-  to  her  case." 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  85 

These  cases  were  in  the  courts  for  five  years,  but  were 
not  decided  judicially.  The  plaintiff's  lawyers  became  tired 
of  the  case,  and  compromised. 

§  29.       INFECTION  OF  DISEASES   FROM    UNCLEAN    INSTRUMENTS. 

The  following  dissertation  is  in  the  nature  of  a  sue;- 
gestion  and  forewarning  in  reference  to  certain  principles 
to  be  observed  in  regard  to  the  cleansing  of  the  instruments 
used  in  performing  surgical-dental  operations.  Numerous 
cases  are  recorded,  and  others  can  be  cited,  to  prove  that  the 
infection  of  persons  with  various  diseases  has  been  caused  by 
the  use  of  unclean  instruments  in  operating.  Patients  have 
been  innoculated  with  the  poisonous  germs  on  these  instru- 
ments, and  the  sorrowful  results  have  been  varying  from  a 
simple  local  inflammation  to  the  most  horrible  of  diseases — 
syphilis. 

In  proof  of  these  facts,  the  following  cases  are  quoted 
from  the  "  Dental  Mirror,"  October,  1890: 

"A  gentleman  in  September,  1884,  visited  a  physician, 
Dr.  L.  D.  Buckley,  of  New  York  city,  to  see  him  about 
what  he  thought  was  a  cancer  on  his  tongue,  but  which 
proved  to  be  a  chancre,  the  characteristic  syphilitic  eruption 
following  shortly  after.  About  a  month  previous  to  his  call- 
ing on  Dr.  Buckley,  he  had  had  some  dental  operations  done, 
and  he  said  he  remembered  that  the  instruments  occasionally 
slipped,  and  his  tongue  was  injured.  The  dentist  did  not 
appear  very  clean  or  particular  about  his  instruments.  As 
he  was  a  married  man  no  other  cause  could  be  found  by 
which  he  could  have  become  affected.  Sir  William  Watson 
published  a  case  of  this  description,  and  John  Hunter  relates 
two  similar  cases  about  which  there  can  be  no  doubt.  J.  C. 
Lettsom  has  recorded  three  cases. 

Dr.  C.  W.  Dulles,  of  Philadelphia,  reports  a  case  which 
was  also  seen  by  the  late  Dr.  Maury.  The  patient,  a  female 
domestic  of  excellent  character,  developed  a  chancre  of  the 
lip,  two  weeks  after  a  visit  to  a  dentist,  who  on  that  occasion 
extracted  a  tooth,  and  later  did  some  cleaning  of  the  teeth. 
Although  the  case  was  hard  to  confirm,  it  seemed  reasonable 


86  DENTAL  JURISPR1  DBNCB. 

to  suppose  that  the  operation  was  in  some  way  responsible 
for  the  inoculation. 

Dr.  F.  M.  Otis,  also  mentions  a  chancre  of  the  lip  which 
occurred  in  a  gentleman  about  three  weeks  after  a  visit  spent 
in  a  dentist's  chair.  Lancereaux  relates  a  similar  case  of 
chancre  of  the  lower  lip  of  a  woman,  after  extraction  of  a 
tooth  and  other  dental  work;  and  Giovannie,  of  Bologna, 
has  reported  a  chancre  of  the  lip  from  a  dentist's  instru- 
ments ;  Leloir  mentions  one  from  the  same  cause ;  Lydston 
has  likewise  reported  a  case  of  a  woman  with  syphilis,  the 
chancre  having-  developed  three  weeks  after  some  cleaning 
and  repairing  done  to  her  teeth.  Roddick,  of  Montreal,  re- 
ports a  very  interesting  case — the  patient  was  the  wife  of  a 
physician  and  the  mother  of  healthy  children.  She  became 
infected  while  having  a  tooth  extracted.  (Dr.  Ottolengui,  in 
Dental  Mirror.) 

Dr.  Barclay  reports  a  case  (Med.  and  Surg.  Rep.,  Feb. 
20th,  1892)  of  a  young  girl,  who,  according  to  his  statement, 
was  poisoned  by  a  dentist.  He  states,  "  that  the  dentist  who 
extracted  her  tooth,  abraded  her  lip ;  "  and,  furthermore,  that 
he  saw  her  three  weeks  afterward,  and  his  opinion,  after  an 
examination  was,  that  she  had  been  poisoned.  This  opinion 
was  corroborated  by  that  of  several  other  physicians,  who 
likewise  examined  the  girl.  In  this  case,  secondary  man- 
ifestations of  syphilis  came  on  in  about  sixty  days;  her  hair 
fell  out,  etc.  This  case  wTas  referred  to  a  lawyer,  and,  without 
doubt,  will  be  taken  into  court. 

Unfortunately,  in  many  of  the  instances  cited  above  the 
dentist  is,  doubtless,  unjustly  accused.  There  are  a  variety 
of  ways  in  which  such  diseases  can  be  transmitted.  For  in- 
stance, as  in  the  case  given  by  Dr.  Buckley,  suppose  this  girl 
had  a  family  friend  who  had  something  on  her  lip  and  that 
she  kissed  her  good-bye  at  a  station  about  the  time  she  re- 
ceived the  injury  at  the  dentist's  hands,  she  would  have  re- 
ceived this  inoculation,  and  the  dentist  would  have  to  bear 
the  blame'  again ;  the  girl  might  have  been  inoculated  by 
drinking  from  a  cup  used  by  others,  or  she  might  have  wiped 
her  face  with  a  towel  that  the  servant  girl  had  used,  or  she 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  O  i 

might  have  contracted  it  in  one  of  a  thousand  other  ways. 
Hence,  when  a  case  of  this  character  comes  into  court  the 
plaintiff  would  have  the  greatest  difficulty  to  prove  that  the 
abrasion  on  the  lip  was  the  site  of  the  chancre,  showing  that 
the  inoculation  was  made  by  the  instrument  that  produced 
the  abrasion. 

The  introduction  of  antisepsis  has  caused  an  entire  revo- 
lution in  the  methods  and  requirements  of  surgery.  The 
recognized  principles  of  surgery  now  demand  that  a  surgeon 
thoroughl}-  disinfect  his  instruments,  before  and  after  operat- 
ing, with  some  solution  (usually  one  of  carbolic  acid),  or  by 
heat  that  will  destroy  any  germs  of  disease  or  bacteria  that 
maybe  on  the  instruments,  and,  further,  as  a  safeguard  and 
preventive  of  infection  by  that  means. 

When  a  principle  of  practice  in  surgery  is  universally 
recognized  in  all  schools  as  a  necessity  to  be  practiced  where 
the  life  may  be  endangered,  without  its  use,  or  injury  result, 
the  law  demands  that  the  surgeon  shall  employ  these  means, 
to  lessen  the  dangers  to  a  minimum. 

No  legal  cases  can  be  cited  in  support  of  the  views  pre- 
sented above,  but  they  certainly  are  in  accordance  with  the 
doctrines  of  the  practice  of  surgery  and  the  principles  of  the 
law. 

It  is  a  well-known  fact,  and  the  above  mentioned  cases 
prove,  that  a  certain  class  of  dental  practitioners  negligently 
and  carelessly  use  instruments,  especially  forceps  for  tooth 
extraction,  without  properly  cleaning  or  disinfecting  them 
before  or  even  after  operating,  and  thus  have  inoculated  pa- 
tients, as  stated,  with  poisonous  germs  and  bacteria  of  diseases. 

It  is  but  just  to  presume,  that  a  dentist  would,  legally, 
be  held  liable  for  the  consequences  of  such  negligence  ;  and  if 
legal  proceedings  were  instituted  against  him,  and  these  facts 
could  be  established,  unquestionably,  he  should,  and  would 
be  mulcted  in  damages. 

.'    30.    RAPE    UNDER    ANAESTHESIA. 

In  the  whole  domain  of  dental  jurisprudence  no  criminal 
charge  brought  in  a  court  of  justice  against  a  dentist,  can  be 


88  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

conceived  more  grave  than  the  accusation  of  having  com- 
mitted rape  on  a  female  in  whom  he  was  inducing  anaesthesia. 
Several  legal  cases  of  this  character  are  recorded,  where  the 
defendant  was  found  guilty  and  sentenced  to  imprisonment 
for  his  alleged  crime.  The  women  no  doubt  believed  that 
they  had  been  violated,  but  it  is  certain  that  in  many  of  these 
cases,  and  probably  in  all  of  them,  they  mistook  the  real 
act  for  the  subjective  erotic  sensations  induced  by  the  anaes- 
thetic. 

That  a  dental  practitioner  in  the  pursuit  of  his  calling  is 
exposed  to  grave  charges  of  this  nature,  is  a  serious  matter 
for  consideration  and  reflection,  requiring  careful  and  deli- 
cate interpretation,  both  morally  and  legally.  Frequently 
the  accusation  is  based  upon  and  solely  sustained  by  the  evi- 
dence of  the  plaintiff,  and,  in  view  of  the  known  tendency 
of  anaesthetics  to  excite  erotic  sensations,  such  evidence  should 
not  be  received  without  the  corroborative  testimony  of  other 
witnesses,  or  circumstances,  as  the  unsupported  evidence  of 
women  under  such  conditions  cannot  be  relied  upon.  Dr. 
II.  C.  Wood  says  that  ""the  valuclessness  of  the  testimony  of 
persons  as  to  occurrences  during  the  time  of  their  intoxica- 
tion with  an  anaesthetic,  should  be  recognized  by  law  as  a 
governing  principle  of  evidence." 

"  Manifestations  of  erotic  sensation  during  artificial 
anaesthesia  have  been  witnessed,  although  rarely,  but  dreams 
of  a  sexual  character  are  doubtless  far  more  frequently  ex- 
perienced, and  very  vividly.  Women  undoubtedly  arc 
more  liable  to  them  than  men,  especially  when  the  admin- 
istration of  the  anaesthetic  takes  place  at  or  about  the  time 
of  periodical  congestion."  (J.  C.  Reeves,  on  Anaesthetics, 
"  Reference  Hand-Book  of  Medical  Sciences.") 

Ether,  from  its  more  stimulating  effect,  produces  these 
dreams  more  frequently  than  chloroform. 

Cases  have  occurred  where  the  woman  was  so  positive 
that  liberties  had  been  taken  with  her  person  during  anaes- 
thesia, that  the  testimony  of  relatives,  who  were  present  all 
the  time,  scarcely  sufficed  to  convince  her  that  she  was  labor- 
ing under  a  delusion.     These  cases  occur  more  frequently 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  89 

than  we  have  knowledge  of,  and  are  compromised  without 
judicial  proceedings  being  instituted. 

The  leading  prosecution  of  this  nature  is  that  of  Dr. 
Beale,  a  highly  respectable  dentist  of  Philadelphia,  a  wid- 
ower; the  patient  a  young  lady  of  unimpeachable  character, 
who  was  engaged  to  be  married,  and  who,  on  the  occasion  in 
question,  was  accompanied  to  the  house  of  Dr.  Beale  by  her 
betrothed.  She  arrived  at  the  dentist's  office  at  about  ten 
o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  after  a  few  moments  spent  in 
awaiting  the  departure  of  two  other  lady  patients,  she  was 
ushered  into  the  doctor's  operating  room.  The  evidence  of 
the  plaintiff,  as  given  at  the  trial,  was,  as  follows  : 

"  I  went  into  the  office ;  took  off  my  bonnet,  and   Dr. 

B went  to  the  wash-stand  to  wash  his  hands  ;  he  asked 

after  the  family.     I  took  a  seat  on  the  operating  chair  ;  in  a 

few  minutes  Dr.  B told  me  one  of  the  men  wanted  to 

speak  to  him,  and  he  gave  me  a  book  to  read  and  left  the 
room ;  did  not  say  what  man  ;  I  supposed  there  were  men 
there.  He  has  a  room  in  which  the  teeth  are  made  ;  I  be- 
lieved the  men  to  be  there.  Dr.  B 's  family  were  out  of  town 

at  that  time;  he  said  so,  and  the  door  was  opened,  and  there 
was  no  furniture  in  the  front  room.     I  don't  know  how  Ions; 

Dr.  B was  absent ;  when  he  came  back  I  was  sitting  in 

the  operating  chair  ;  he  went  to  the  instrument  case  and  be- 
gan with  my  tooth  ;  the  tooth  was  on  the  left  side  ;  he  com- 
menced operating  on  the  tooth  before  he  gave  me  ether ;  the 
operation  was  very  painful ;  he  said  he  would  either  put 
something  in  to  destroy  the  nerve  or  give  me  ether,  leaving 
the  choice  tome.  I  told  him  I'd  prefer  taking  ether;  I 
didn't  learn  what  he  proposed  putting  into  the  tooth ;  he 
gave  me  the  ether  on  a  small  napkin,  folded  up.  I  felt  very 
dizzy  at  first;  I  was  cold  and  felt  very  numb  ;  it  increased 
upon  me ;  I  did  not  lose  my  consciousness  of  what  I  was 
doing ;  I  continued  to  breathe  the  ether  ;  my  eyes  were 
closed ;  I  closed  them  voluntarily ;  I  did  not  try  to  open 
them  for  some  time  after.  After  he  gave  the  ether  he  did 
not,  as  I  remember,  operate  on  my  tooth  ;  he  felt  my  pulse 
era!  times,  put  his  hand  on  my  arm  under  the  sleeve  up 


90  DENTAL  JUBISPR1  DENGE. 

my  arm.  I  had  a  loose  sleeve ;  he  did  it  once;  he  put  his 
hand  on  my  breast  under  my  dress  on  the  bosom,  he  put  his 
hand  on  my  person  under  my  dress.  I  have  a  distinct  mem- 
ory of  that.  I  was  not  able  to  make  any  resistance  or  out- 
cry. He  went  round  before  me  and  raised  my  clothes.  I 
am  perfectly  distinct  in  my  memory  of  that.  I  did  not  try 
to  cry  out;  do  not  know  if  I  was  able.  After  he  had 
raised  my  clothes  my  feet  were  crossed,  and  he  raised  them 
and  put  one  on  each  side  of  the  stool :  he  then  put  his  arm  around 
me  under  my  clothes.  He  drew  me  down  to  the  edge  of  the 
chair.  I  do  not  know  what  he  did  after  that  till  I  felt  pain  ; 
he  did  enter  my  person ;  it  was  then  that  I  felt  the  pain  ; 
I  was  not  able  to  cry  out  or  resist ;  I  did  not  try.  I  don't 
know  what  was  his  position.  My  eyes  were  closed.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  he  did  enter  my  person,  and  did  give  me  pain. 
All  this  time  I  was  conscious  of  everything  that  was  going 
on.  After  this  he  left  me  and  crossed  the  room  to  the  wash- 
stand.  I  heard  him  pour  out  water  into  the  basin.  After 
he  had  been  to  the  washstand  and  returned,  I  opened  my 
eyes  and  saw  *my  clothes  up  ;  he  did  not  see  me.  I  have  a 
clear  recollection  of  seeing  my  clothes  up.  I  closed  my  eyes 
immediately.  He  put  down  my  clothes,  and  in  a  few  min- 
utes he  was  at  the  side  of  the  chair  and  lifted  me  up  into  the 
seat.  I  was  just  to  the  edge  of  the  seat.  It  was  a  large 
dentist's  chair.  In  a  few  minutes  he  told  me  he'd  have  to 
take  the  tooth  out ;  that  was  the  first  remark  he  made,  ex- 
cept the  first  when  he  asked  me  if  I  was  getting  sleepy.  At 
the  time  he  entered  my  person  I  did  not  feel  his  person 
against  me  ;  pain  I  distinctly  felt.  When  he  spoke  about 
taking  out  the  tooth  I  asked  him  why.  He  said  they  were 
both  decayed  and  he  could  not  save  them  both.  I  told  him 
I  was  afraid  it  would  pain  me,  and  he  said  he  would  not  let 
it ;  he  then  gave  me  more  ether  and  extracted  the  tooth.  It 
was  on  the  left  side  ;  when  he  extracted  the  tooth  it  was 
painful;  I  screamed  then  ;  he  then  assisted  me  to  rise  and 
led  me  to  the  rocking-chair.  I  felt  a  little  dizzy  when  he 
led  me  to  the  rocking-chair.  He  then  went  out  of  the  room, 
and  in  a  few  moments  came  up  with    a    lady.     T  have    not 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  91 

*een  her  since.  He  asked  me  if  I  would  be  introduced  to 
her.  I  believe  I  said  no.  He  did  not  introduce  me  then. 
I  heard  him  tell  the  lady  he'd  always  been  our  dentist,  and 
that  we  had  never  been  to  any  other.  He  said  my  teeth 
were  very  good  ;  he  said  I  had  taken  ether  when  the  tooth 
was  extracted.  I  think  she  said  something  about  hearing 
me  scream.  He  said  yes,  ether  had  not  much  effect  on  me ;  I 
was  either  nervous  or  for  some  cause.  In  a  little  while  I  got 
up  and  he  introduced  me  to  the  lady.     I  think  it  was  Mrs. 

P .     I  made  several  remarks,  but  I  don't  know  what 

they  were.  I  then  put  on  my  bonnet,  and  Dr.  B fol- 
lowed me  down  stairs.  The  lady  was  left  upstairs  ;  he  came 
to  the  door,  and  I  wanted  to  stop  an  omnibus ;  he  asked  me 
how  far  I  was  going,  and  I  told  him  to  Third  street  and 
Lombard  ;  he  told  me  I  had  better  walk.  He  said  he 
thought  I  had  some  of  the  ether  in  me,  and  the  walking; 
would  do  me  good.     I  walked  down  "Walnut  to  Sixth,  and 

did  not  get  into  an  omnibus.     I  did  not  reproach  Dr.  B 

at  the  house  ;  I  was  afraid.     I  stopped  in  C 's  ice-cream 

saloon  at  Sixth  below  Pine.  I  got  ice-cream.  I  went 
then  along  Sixth  street  to  Spruce,  and  down  to  Third  and 
Lombard  streets.  I  was  going  to  see  a  young  woman  who 
sent  for  me.     I  did  see  her  ;  don't  recollect  how  long  I  was 

there  ;  when  I  left  I  came  up  to  Mr.  T 's,  at  Chestnut 

street,  near  Fifth.     I  was  very  intimate  with  Mr.  and  Mrs. 

T .     I  met  Mr.  M on  the  way  up,  near  Sixth  and 

Chestnut  streets.  He  joined  me  and  spoke  to  me  ;  did  not 
accompany  me  to  Mr.  T         's  ;  did  not  meet  any  but  those 

I   have   named.     I  reached   Mrs.    T 's  at   one   o'clock ; 

they  had  not  been  to  dinner.     I  first  mentioned   to   Mrs. 

T what  had  occurred  at  Dr.  B 's  the  same  day,  after 

tea.     That  afternoon  I  was  taken  unwell ;  it  was  the  usual 

time.     The  door  of  the  dentistry-room  at  Dr.  B 's  was 

phut ;  there  are  two  in  the  room,   the  one  leading  to  the 

entry  door  was  closed.     Dr.  B said  he  closed  the  door 

because  the  smell  of  ether  would  go  over  the  house;  the 
door  was  shut  before  he  gave  me  the  ether  ;  the  chair  is  one 
that  leans  backward." 


<»2  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

Re-examined. — "I  said  Dr.  B generally  used  me 

like  a  lady.  lie  said,  a  year  ago,  lie  should  like  me  for  his 
second  wife;  he  had  a  good  many  children,  but  they  should 
not  trouble  me,  as  he  would  get  nurses  for  them.  I  spoke  of 
it  at  home  to  my  mother  and  sisters.  After  the  doctor  took 
me  out  of  the  chair  after  the  operation,  all  I  said  was  in 
answer  to  questions  by  him,  or  to  remarks ;  the  reason  why 
I  did  make  another  appointment  with  him  (Dr.  B.)  was  that 
I  did  not  want  him  to  know  that  I  knew  anything  of  his 
conduct.     I  had  not  concluded  what  course  to  pursue." 

The  result  of  this  case  was  that  Dr.  B was  found 

guilty  of  rape,  and  sentenced  to  four  years  and  six  months 
imprisonment. 

In  this  case  no  corroborative  testimony  was  given  to 
sustain  the  indictment,  the  dentist  being  convicted  solely 
upon  the  evidence  of  the  young  lady  herself,  who  averred 
that  during  the  whole  period  occupied  by  the  assault  she  was 
too  profoundly  under  the  influence  of  the  anaesthetic  to  either 
resist  or  make  an  outcry,  but  remained  entirely  passive. 

It  was  admitted  b}'  the  plaintiff  that  etherization  had 
taken  from  her  the  power  of  voluntary  action ;  her  testimony 
obviously  is  then  derived  solely  from  her  remembrance  of 
what  occurred  while  in  this  condition. 

"  Under  every  rule  of  evidence,  the  testimony  of  any 
witness  is  the  remembrance  of  that  witness  of  a  material  fact 
observed  by  him  or  her  while  possessed  of  perceptive  facul- 
ties and  in  a  state  of  rational  consciousness.  But  even  this 
definition  is  not  sufficiently  broad  to  include  the  testimony 
of  the  witness  in  this  leading  case.  For,  observe  as  the  pros- 
ecutrix complaining  of  an  assault,  the  gravamen  of  her  case 
was  the  admission  that  she  was  so  far  under  the  toxic  influ- 
ence of  the  anaesthetic  as  to  be  and  remain  entirely  passive 
under  the  alleged  assault.  According  to  her  statement,  not 
only  did  she  oiler  no  voluntary  resistance,  but  her  admission 
carries  with  it  the  assertion  that  the  administration  of  the 
agent  had  been  carried  to  that  point  where  the  muscular 
system  fails  to  respond  in  the  way  of  reflex  action  to  exciting 
causes.     This  is  the  witness's  own  statement  necessary  to  her 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  93 

case,  and  must  be  considered  in  judging  her  fitness  as  a  wit- 
ness."   (C.  B.  Garrison,  Vol.  III.  p.  962,  Amer.  Sys.  Dent.) 

The  question  as  to  the  capability  of  a  female  giving 
evidence  relative  to  what  occurred  during  the  period  of  ether- 
ization, and  the  possibility  of  resistance  under  such  circum- 
stances, receives  an  answer  in  the  subjoined  remarks,  quoted 
from  Wharton  and  Stille's  Med.  Juris.,  Vol.  III.: 

"  There  is  a  striking  analogy  between  the  effects  of  ether 
and  those  of  alcohol ;  the  chief  difference  being  in  the  more 
rapid  and  complete  insensibility  produced  by  the  former, 
and  the  more  evanescent  character  of  the  intoxication.  There 
is  a  period  of  excitement,  stupor,  and  of  recovery,  and  the 
phenomena  in  different  individuals  vary  according  to  their 
temperatures  and  habits.  In  general  the  state  of  excitement 
in  etherized  patients  is  short,  and  verges  rapidly  into  that  of 
unconsciousness  and  insensibility  to  pain.  The  vapors  of 
ether  seem  literally  to  ascend  and  diffuse  themselves  through 
the  brain,  and  to  permeate  every  portion  of  the  body ;  the 
patient  has  a  sense  of  fullness  and  warmth  ;  the  whole  body 
feels  lighter  and  seems  to  spurn  the  earth ;  the  sense  of  hear- 
ing becomes  confused  ;  the  sight  dim,  and  the  touch  be- 
numbed. External  objects  lose  themselves  in  a  confused  mist, 
which  appear  to  swell  their  proportions  and  contort  their 
^hape  ;  the  muscles  become  relaxed,  and  the  patient  sinks 
lethargic  and  unconscious  into  profound  sleep."  (Wharton 
and  Stille,  Med.  Juris.) 

The  patient  responds  to  external  impressions  only  in  an 
automatic  way  during  the  transition  into  a  stage  of  entire 
sensibility.  He  is  entirely  oblivious  of  the  most  painful  oper- 
ations ;  all  his  movements  are  instinctive,  and  though  an 
expression  of  pain  is  depicted  upon  the  face,  and  the  hands 
are  raised  against  the  operator  as  he  attempts  to  draw  a 
tooth,  it  is  not  an  expression  of  suffering.  The  recovery 
from  the  advanced  stages  of  anesthesia  is  sudden,  as  in  the 
waking  from  a  profound  natural  sleep  ;  the  perceptions  are 
but  a  few  moments  confused,  even  while  the  person  thinks 
himself  fully  awake  and  appears  to  be  so.  There  is  then  a 
remission  into  the  stage  of  intoxication,  and  the  same  symp- 


94  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

toms  are  manifested  in  the  recovery  as  when  the  ether  is 
administered. 

In  the  inhalation  of  ether  the  lapse  into  consciousness  is 
rapid,  and  cannot  be  divided  into  distinct  intervals.  Fre- 
quently the  sensation  of  pain  is  lost  before  outward  conscious- 
ness is  entirely  lost. 

Several  instances  can  be  related  in  support  of  this  state- 
ment. A  case  is  recorded  in  which  the  patient  looked  on 
calmly  while  a  severe  operation  was  being  performed  on  Lis 
body,  and  apparently  painless.  In  this  instance,  although 
the  patient  replied  correctly  when  questioned,  still  he 
imagined  himself  in  a  distant  country,  showing  that  per- 
ception was  by  no  means  unperverted.  A  similar  case  is  re- 
ported by  Velpeau,  who  states  that,  while  performing  an 
operation  upon  a  young  girl,  she  raised  herself  into  a  sitting 
position  as  if  to  observe.  She  said  afterwards  that  she  sup- 
posed she  was  at  a  dinner  table.     (Rev.  Med.,  1847.) 

It  is  unquestionably  the  experience  of  every  practitioner 
who  administers  anaesthetics  to  observe  that,  in  the  majority 
of  cases,  the  patient  has  an  illusion  of,  or  hallucination  of, 
some  occurrence  entirely  foreign  to  the  operation.  The  per- 
ceptions are  perverted,  the  illusions  sometimes  being  sug- 
gested by  the  scene  actually  passing,  and,  at  others,  arising 
without  being  prompted  by  external  perceptions. 

Xumerous  cases  illustrating  this  fact  are  quoted  by  Dr. 
Flagg  (Ether  and  Chloroform,  etc.).  The  following  cases 
are  derived  from  that  source,  and  are  also  quoted  in  Wharton 
and  Stille's  Med.  Juris. : 

"After  an  operation  performed  on  the  forehead  of  Mr. 

T ,  a  dentist  of  this  city,  he  said,  that  although  his 

eyes  were  shut,  he  saw  every  cut  of  the  knife.  He  saw 
the  shape  of  the  wound  upon  the  forehead,  and,  what 
was  better  than  all,  this  cutting  appeared  to  be  done 
upon  someone  else."  Again,  "  A  little  girl,  the  extraction 
of  whose  tooth  made  a  report  like  the  drawing  of  a  corkr 
sprang  out  of  the  chair,  crouched  upon  the  floor,  and  looked 
up   anxiously   at   me,  and   inquired  if  anybody  had   been 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  95 

killed.  She  supposed  she  had  been  traveling  on  a  locomo- 
tive, which  had  blown  up  and  thrown  her  into  the  air." 

Xumerous  illustrations  of  this  character  may  be  cited  to 
demonstrate  the  fact  that  patients,  while  anaesthetized,  have 
been  completely  oblivious  of  their  surroundings,  and  entirely 
ignorant  of  what  was  in  reality  occurring  at  the  time  ;  and 
they  have  in  no  wise  realized,  or  dreamed,  that  they  were  the 
subjects  of  a  severe  surgical  operation. 

In  the  anesthetic  state  the  will  no  longer  exercises  its 
control  over  the  mental  faculties.  The  thoughts  run  in  their 
accustomed  track  or  in  any  direction,  and  are  generally 
guided  by  the  impressions  made  upon  the  nerves  of  general 
or  special  sensation.  The  power  of  restraining  them  is  lost, 
and  if  the  dream  is  a  pleasant  one,  there  is  no  desire  to  es- 
cape these  thoughts  ;  but  the  reverse  is  the  case  when  the 
illusions  are  painful  or  disagreeable.  Movements  under  these 
circumstances  imply  an  exercise  of  the  will  power,  and  is 
almost  always  due  to  illusions  proceeding  from  external  im- 
pressions. 

To  demonstrate  that  the  power  of  the  will  over  the  mus- 
cular movement  is  not  entirely  abolished  in  etherization,  we 
need  but  refer  to  the  following  case,  quoted  in  Wharton  and 
Stille's  Med.  Juris. :  "A  young  man  having  been  sufficiently 
etherized,  the  dentist  prepared  to  extract  a  tooth.  In  a  mo- 
ment he  dashed  the  instrument  from  his  mouth,  left  the 
•  hair,  and,  striding  about  the  room,  demanded  what  they 
meant  to  do  with  him.  In  a  few  moments  the  effects  of  the 
ether  passed  off.  Being  again  put  under  its  influence  the 
same  scene  was  enacted  with  even  greater  violence,  and  he 
endeavored  to  jump  out  of  the  window.  When  he  regained 
his  memory, he  related  that  he  imagined  himself  surrounded 
by  a  great  number  of  enemies,  one  of  whom  endeavored  to 
drive  a  nail  into  his  mouth,  and  being  unable  to  struggle 
with  them,  he  sought  safety  in  flight"  (Union  Med.,  Sept., 
1857.)  Other  examples  of  this  nature  may  be  cited.  Again, 
the  muscular  movement  is  not  entirel}'  abolished  in  etheriza- 
tion ;  the  muscles  are  related,  but  not  paralyzed. 

If  the  patient  exercises  his  will  to  make  any  movement, 


96  DENTAL    .11  RISPR1  DBNCB. 

the  fact  is  due  either  to  the  pleasurable  or  trivial  character 
of  his  mental  perception,  or  to  the  temporary  or  complete 
unconsciousness  and  insensibility  produced  by  the  anaesthetic. 

It  is  well-established  that  in  the  advanced  stage  of  an- 
aesthesia, when  perfect  narcotism  is  produced,  if  the  power 
of  resistance  is  lost,  so  also  is  the  consciousness  of  any  real 
motive  for  it. 

In  demonstration  of  this  fact  it  may  be  said  that,  if  an 
outrage  be  perpetrated  on  a  woman  lying  wholly  uncon- 
scious and  helpless,  she  cannot  be  cognizant  of  any  liberties 
taken  with  her  person,  and  will  not  therefore  make  any  op- 
position to  them.  Moreover,  it  would  be  impossible  for  her 
afterwards  to  describe  with  elaborate  detail,  the  manner  and 
particulars  of  the  assault,  and  yet  have  been  incapable  of  re- 
sisting it.  If  her  muscles  and  voice  have  been  paralyzed, 
so  also  has  her  outward  consciousness  ;  and  all  remembrance 
of  occurrences  during  this  stage  of  etherization  is  wholly 
confined  to  the  outward  mental  perceptions — to  dreams 
which  have  all  the  vividness  of  real  occurrences. 

The  plea  of  irregularity  of  action  of  the  anaesthetic  has 
been  advanced,  but  it  may  be  stated  that  anaesthetics  are  as 
constant  in  their  mode  of  action  and  as  little  liable  to  vari- 
ation as  any  medical  agents,  and  that  such  wide  departures 
from  their  ordinary  effect,  as  consciousness  of  pain,  with  ina- 
bility to  resist,  is  highly  improbable  and  inconsistent,  and 
only  to  be  accepted  as  a  fact  upon  the  presentation  of  abund- 
ant positive  testimony  of  competent  observers.  The  follow- 
ing summary  of  this  branch  of  the  subject  is  taken  from 
Wharton  and  Stille's  Med.  Juris.,  Vol.  III.,  and  the  proposi- 
tion may  be  assumed  as  correct: 

First,  that  the  consciousness  of  perception  of  external 
objects  and  impressions  is  impaired  in  the  early,  and  lost  in 
the  final,  stage  of  etherization. 

Second,  that  during  the  time  the  mind  remains  suscep- 
tible to  external  impressions  at  all,  these  reach  it  in  a  feeble 
or  perverted  manner. 

Third,  that  the  emotions,  especially  those  of  erotic  char- 
acter, are  excited  by  the  inhalation  of  ether. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  97 

Fourth,  the  voluntary  muscular  movement  is  not  para- 
lyzed until  the  state  of  perfect  narcotism  is  produced,  at 
which  time,  however,  all  outward  consciousness  is  extinct. 

Fifth,  that  the  memory  of  what  has  passed  during  the 
state  of  etherization  is  either  of  events  wholly  unreal,  or  of 
real  occurrences  perverted  from  their  actual  nature. 

Sixth,  that  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  impressions 
left  by  the  dreams  occasioned  by  ether,  may  remain  perma- 
nently fixed  in  the  memory  with  all  the  vividness  of  real 
events. 

Much  evidence  in  the  support  of  these  views  was  given 
by  dentists  at  the  meetings  of  various  dental  societies  in 
New  York,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore  and  other  cities,  and  in 
consequence  thereof,  and  the  large  amount  of  testimony  pre- 
sented by  physicians  and  dentists  to  prove  that  ether  fre- 
quently produced  erotic  sensations  and  hallucinations  of  that 

character,   Dr.    B was  subsequently  pardoned    by   the 

Executive  of  State. 

A  case  similar  to  that  of  Dr.  B occurred  at  Mon- 
treal, in  1858  ;  here,  a  dentist  was  indicted  for  attempting 
to  commit  a  rape  upon  one  of  his  patients  under  the  influ- 
ence of  chloroform.  At  the  trial,  a  witness  testified  that  his 
wife  was  under  the  impression  that  she  had  been  vio- 
lated by  the  prisoner,  while  under  the  influence  of  chloro- 
form ;  yet  her  husband  was  present  during  the  whole  time 
she  was  unconscious.  The  jury  rendered  a  verdict  of  guilty 
of  an  attempt  to  commit  a  rape,  with  a  recommendation  to 
mercy. — Boston  Med.  and  Surg.  Journ.,  November,  1858,  p. 
287. 

For  another  case  of  this  character  see  post  §  266., 
Wharton  &  Stille's  Med.  Juris. 

Again,  a  dentist,  K ,  of  Brandenburg,  Prussia,  was 

sentenced  by  the  jury  court  of  Potsdam  to  a  term  of  four  years 
imprisonment  iu  the  penitentiary,  for  repeated  cases  of  rape 
committed  during  his  dental  practice. 

Jas.  T.  Grant,  a  dentist,  was  charged,  at  the  Jersey 
(Channel  Isles)  police  court,  on  October  8th,  1872,  with  com- 
mitting an  indecenl  assaull  upon  Carolina  Pope,  a  servant. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

He  gave  her  gas,  and  it  was  alleged,  while  under  its  effects, 
grossly  outraged  her.  Testimony  was  ottered  to  corroborate 
this  statement.  Xo  evidence  of  a  rape  was  produced. 
Witnesses  gave  Mr.  Grant  the  highest  moral  character,  etc. 
The  defendant  was  committed  for  trial  on  the  charge  of  in- 
decent  assault,  and  admitted  to  bail  in  $250.  The  trial  oc- 
curred November  11th.  The  case  for  the  prosecution  failed,, 
and  the  jury  found  a  verdict  of  not  guilty  for  the  defendant. 
—Cosmos  XIV,  659  ;  XV,  82. 

In  all  of  these  cases  no  testimony  was  produced  by  the 
prosecution  to  show  that  an  examination  of  the  plaintiff's 
person  and  clothing  was  made,  directly  or  within  a  reason- 
able time  after  the  alleged  assault  occurred,  to  prove  recent 
detloration  of  the  plaintiff.  The  establishment  of  this  fact 
by  testimony  is  always  considered  important  evidence,  neces- 
sary to  the  conviction  of  the  defendant  who  is  charged  with 
committing  a  felonious  assault. 

Evidence  has  been  brought  forward  to  prove  that  co- 
caine, when  injected  hypodermically,  produces  erotic  excite- 
ment. 

A  Philadelphia  physician  reports  giving  a  hypodermic 
injection  of  a  few  drops  of  a  10  per  cent,  solution  of  cocaine 
in  a  woman  from  whose  face  he  proposed  to  remove  a  small 
tumor.  The  erotic  excitement  that  followed  led  the  patient 
to  behave  in  a  most  unseeming  way,  although  her  usual  con- 
duct was  modest  and  becoming. 

A  St.  Paul  dentist  reports  a  similar  experience,  his 
patient  making  indecent  exposure  while  under  the  influence 
of  a  small  injection  of  cocaine. — Medical  Brief  and  Dental 
Mirror,  Oct.,  1890. 

Dentists  should  indeed  be  careful  and  on  their  guard,, 
since  they  use  cocaine  for  treating  and  extracting  teeth,  and 
are  so  frequently  alone  with  their  patients. 

In  view  of  the  known  tendency  of  anesthetics  to  excite 
hallucinations  and  erotic  sensations,  and  of  the  loss  of  char- 
acter, liberty  and  ruination  of  all  professional  prospects,  if 
convicted  on  the  charge  of  rape,  it  is  evident  that  no  dental 
practitioner  should  administer  anaesthetics  to  female  patients 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  99 

excepting  there  be  a  witness  or  attendant  present.  This 
precaution  is  not  to  be  overrated,  for  too  frequently  are  the 
cases  of  attempted — and  sometimes  successful — blackmail,, 
where  the  dentist  is  threatened  with  prosecution  if  he  refuses 
to  compromise  by  the  payment  of  the  monetary  consideration 
demanded.  The  author  has  learned  of  several  cases  of  this 
nature,  but  not  having  the  particulars,  is  unable  to  cite  them. 
The  above  warning,  if  heeded,  may  save  many  dentists 
from  misfortune  and  the  clutches  of  blackmailers ;  whereas 
its  neglect  may  ruin  his  whole  professional  career. 

§  31.    COMPULSORY   SERVICE. 

A  dental  practitioner  cannot,  legally,  be  compelled  to- 
render  professional  services  to  a  patient  when  requested. 
Though  dentists  have  been  threatened,  if  not  actually  suedr 
for  their  refusal  to  perform  certain  operations,  there  is  no 
foundation  in  law  for  such  compulsion.  A  dental  surgeon 
is  not  a  common  carrier,  as  his  professional  services  at  their 
inception  are  purely  voluntary  ;  but  when  once  he  has  under- 
taken a  case,  he  must  continue  his  services,  unless  he  is  dis- 
missed, or  until  reasonable  time  has  been  given  to  procure 
other  attendance,  even  if  the  services  are  gratuitous. 

§  32.  COMPENSATION  CONTRACTS  FOR  SERVICES  MAY  BE  EXPRESSED 

OR  IMPLIED. 

The  contract  between  a  dentist  and  his  patient  for  com- 
pensation for  services  rendered,  like  that  of  a  physician,  may 

be  EXPRESSED  Or  IMPLIED. 

An  express  contract  is  one  that  is  formally  stated,  either 
verbally  or  in  writing  ;  while  an  implied  contract  is  one  that 
is  inferred  from  the  acts  and  conduct  of  the  parties  and  the 
attendant  circumstances. 

A  contract  between  the  dental  practitioner  and  his  pa- 
tient is  usually  an  implied  one,  and  may  he  enforced  the 
-;n no  as  an  express  contract. 

The  legal  presumption  is,  that  agreements  and  stipula- 
tions are  supposed  to  have  been  made  between  the  parties, 
such  as  fair  and  honest  men  ought  to  have  made  under  like 


100  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

circumstances.  (Nevins  v.  Lowe,  40  111.,  209;  Ogden  >\ 
Saunders,  12  Wheat.,  W.  S.,  341 ;  Secoa  v.  True,  53  isT.  II., 
627  ;  Field's  Medico-Legal  Guide,  §  112.) 

Under  the  implied  contract,  the  general  practitioner 
agrees  to  render  certain  services,  with  the  ordinary  degree 
of  skill,  and  with  due  care,  and  he  does  not  hecome  an  in- 
surer or  assume  the  responsibility  of  the  results. 

The  practitioner  assumes,  under  the  ordinarily  implied 
contract,  to  render  but  a  fair  average  degree  of  knowledge 
and  skill,  and  legally  it  is  not  expected  of  him  that  he  will 
exercise  an  extreme  degree  of  skill. 

Frequently  the  defendant,  to  avoid  the  contract,  offers 
the  plea  of  defense,  that  no  benefit  has  accrued  to  him.  The 
court  will  not  sustain  a  defense  of  this  nature,  unless  it  be 
proven  that  the  practitioner,  by  reason  of  his  lack  of  ordi- 
nary skill,  defrauded  the  defendant  who  believed  that  he 
possessed  the  requisite  skill. 

A  dental  practitioner  is  not  liable  for  the  use  of  more 
than  ordinary  skill,  unless  a  contract  for  this  purpose  be 
made,  or  unless  such  a  contract  is  to  be  inferred  from  all  the 
circumstances  of  the  case.     (McCandless  v.  McWha.) 

In  the  case  of  Simonds  v.  Henry  (39  Me.,  159),  it  was  de- 
cided, that  "  a  dentist  is  required  to  use  a  reasonable  degree 
of  care  and  skill  in  the  manufacture  and  fitting  of  artificial 
teeth,"  and  that,  "  the  exercise  of  the  highest  perfection  of 
his  art  is  not  implied  in  his  professional  contract." 

In  this  case,  the  suit  was  to  recover  a  fee  for  an  artificial 
denture. 

The  contract  was  made  with  the  wife  for  the  manufac- 
ture of  the  teeth  for  a  certain  price,  with  the  knowledge  and 
assent  of  the  defendant,  the  husband.  When  put  in  her 
mouth,  she  complained  that  they  felt  odd  and  pained  her. 
The  plate  was  then  somewhat  filed,  but  she  still  complained 
and  declined  to  pay  for  them.  It  was  agreed  that  she  might 
take  them  away  and  return  them  on  the  following  Monday, 
when  she  returned  and  said  she  could  never  wear  them. 
Something  further  was  clone  to  the  teeth,  but  she  declined 
to  pay  for  them,  and  left  them,  although  the  plaintiff  forbade 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  101 

her  so  doing  and  claimed  his  pay.  There  was  conflicting 
evidence  whether  the  teeth  fitted  her  mouth.  By  one  it  was 
testified  that  it  was  a  good  piece  of  work  ;  by  another  that 
they  were  a  fair  average  piece  of  work,  and  by  a  third  that 
they  were  nothing  extra.  Among  other  instructions  the  jury 
was  told,  that  if  the  plaintiff  had  used  all  the  knowledge 
and  skill  his  profession  had  attained  at  that  time,  it  would 
be  all  that  would  be  required  of  him,  and  that  they  would 
determine  from  the  testimony  whether  the  teeth  were  pro- 
perly made  and  fitted  to  the  mouth.  A  verdict  was  rendered 
for  the  defendant. 

Exceptions  were  taken  to  the  instructions  "  which  re- 
quired the  dental  practitioner  to  possess  and  use  the  highest 
knowledge  and  skill  of  his  profession."  Burrows,  in  support 
of  the  exceptions,  cited  Lamphier  v.  Phips,  8  Carr  &  Payne, 
475 ;  Sears  v.  Prentice,  8  East,  348 ;  Hoacke  v.  Hopper,  7  P. 
&  C,  81 ;  McClellan  v.  Adams,  19  Pick,  333  ;  Chitty  on  Con- 
tracts, 553-554,  etc. 

The  exceptions  were  sustained,  and  a  new  trial  ordered. 

The  rule,  as  stated  in  these  cases,  is  laid  down  in  Potter 
v.  Wiggins,  51  Maine,  594,  as  follows : 

"  Physicians  and  surgeons  (and  this  rule  is  also  appli- 
cable to  dental  surgeons)  offering  themselves  to  the  public  as 
practitioners,  impliedly  promise  thereby  that  they  possess 
the  requisite  knowledge  and  skill  to  treat  such  cases  as  they 
undertake,  with  reasonable  success." 

The  rule  does  not  require  the  possession  of  the  highest, 
or  even  the  average  skill,  knowledge  or  experience ;  only 
such  as  will  enable  them  to  treat  the  case  understandingly 
and  safely. 

"  The  law  implies  that  they  will  exercise  reasonable  and 
ordinary  care  and  intelligence  in  all  cases  they  undertake." 
{Ibid.) 

"And  they  are  bound  to  use  their  best  skill  and  judg- 
ment in  determining  the  nature  of  the  malady,  the  best 
mode  of  treatment,  and  in  all  respects  to  do  their  best  to 
secure  a  perfect  restoration  of  their  patients."     (Ibid.) 

"  They  do  not  stipulate  success  and  arc  not  liable  for 


102  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

failure  in  that  respect,  unless  through  sonic  default  of  their 
duty."     {Ibid.) 

When  a  patient  accepts  the  services  of  a  dentist,  he  en- 
ters into  an  implied  contract,  in  which  it  is  agreed,  on  the 
one  hand,  that  the  dentist  will  render  certain  services,  suit- 
able to  his  undertaking  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  tin- 
party  who  accepts  the  services,  promises  to  pay  an  adequate 
reward  fixed  by  the  first  party  for  the  services  rendered. 

The  law  imposes  upon  both  parties  the  duty  of  fulfilling 
the  obligations  incident  to  the  contract.  The  dentist  cannot 
withdraw  from  the  contract,  unless  he  is  dismissed  by  the 
patient  or  party  employing  him,  or  until  he  gives  reasonable 
notice  of  his  intention  of  doing  so. 

Professional  men  are  not  to  be  considered  as  warrantors 
of  the  results  of  their  work,  as  they  never  impliedly  stipulate 
for  success  at  all  events  ;  unless,  as  is  sometimes  the  custom 
of  dental  practitioners,  to  warrant  the  permanency  of  certain 
work  or  operations.  The  practitioner  can  give  his  assurance 
that  the  operation  was  performed  to  the  best  of  his  ability  ; 
and  never,  but  in  special  instances,  should  he  guarantee  the 
permanency  of  an  operation  or  cure.  In  the  treatment  of  cer- 
tain patients,  dental  practitioners  have  many  adverse  circum- 
stances,conditions,  and  causes  to  combat,  and  contingences  may 
arise  which  render  the  stability  of  their  operations  an  uncer- 
tainty. As  in  the  failure  of  gold  fillings,  due  to  the  neglect  of 
the  patient  to  keep  the  mouth  in  a  clean  condition,  which 
gives  rise  to  micro-organisms,  or  produces  an  acid  condition  of 
the  mouth,  thus  causing  the  recurrence  of  decay.  Again,  an 
alveolar  abscess  or  any  other  disease  peculiar  to  the  teeth, 
which  the  dentist  has  apparently  cured,  may  recur,  but  which 
is  not  attributable  to  the  dentist's  neglect ;  however,  by  war- 
ranting the  permanency  of  the  cure,  he  is  bound  to  fulfil 
his  contract  and  insure  the  permanency  of  the  cure  for  the 
stipulated  period,  or  no  compensation  or  fee  is  justly  due 
him. 

It  would  be  a  more  just  principle  if  the  dentist  would 
give  the  assurance  of  his  good  faith  and  intentions,  and  im- 
plicitly charge  the  patient  to   aid  him  by   eveiy  possible 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  103 

means  to  insure  a  successful  operation  or  cure,  and  should 
any  trouble  or  contingencies  result  that  can  be  attributed  to 
the  dentist's  neglect,  he  will  honorably  make  all  reasonable 
amends.  The  reason  of  this  rule  has  been  clearly  stated,  as 
follows :  Where  the  result  desired,  as  in  the  cases  cited 
above,  depends  both  on  the  skill  in  the  use  of  the  means,  and 
the  influence  of  other  causes,  the  law  raises  no  such  implied 
■engagement;  it  regards  the  engagement  only  for  the  use  of 
the  proper  means. 

The  retainer  of  a  lawyer  obliges  him  to  the  right  con- 
duct of  a  suit,  but  not  for  the  judgment  of  the  court,  for  that 
is  beyond  his  control.  The  retainer  of  a  physician  obliges 
him  to  the  employment  of  ordinary  medical  skill  in  the 
treatment  of  his  patient ;  the  cure  does  not  rest  with  him. 
{Gallagher  v.  Thompson,  Wright,  Oh.  Rep.,  466.) 

When  a  special  agreement  is  made  between  the  dental 
practitioner  and  his  patient,  or  if  an  express  contract  existed 
by  which  a  definite  result  was  guaranteed,  or  when  the 
agreement  required  an  absolute  cure  or  a  successful  opera- 
tion, or  there  should  be  no  compensation,  the  parties  in  these 
cases  must  abide  by  the  terms  of  the  contract  or  agreement. 

A  contract  between  a  dentist-surgeon  and  his  patient 
will  be  declared  void,  if  fraud  on  the  part  of  either  can  be 
shown. 

In  the  case  of  Allen  v.  Davis  (4  DeG.  and  Smale,  133), 
cited  by  Daniel  Nason,  Esq.,  "  Simpson  gave  a  bill  of  ex- 
change for  over  £200  to  one  Davis,  a  dentist,  it  being 
agreed,  as  was  alleged  by  the  latter,  that  he  should,  during 
the  former's  whole  life,  attend  to  his  teeth,  and  supply  him 
with  new  ones  from  time  to  time.  He  also  alleged  that  the 
price  of  a  set  of  teeth  varied  from  £30  to  £50.  The  body 
of  the  bill  was  in  the  dentist's  handwriting;  the  only  part, if 
any,  in  the  handwriting  of  the  patient,  was  the  signature. 
It  was  said  to  have  been  given  in  the  dentist's  house  with- 
out the  presence  of  a  third  party.  Simpson  died  before  the 
bill  came  due,  and  it  did  not  appear  that  any  one  had  heard 
of  it  before  his  death ;  nor  did  it  appear  that  the  contract 
woe  in   writing.     Other  circumstances   connected   with  the 


104  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

case  were,  that  after  Simpson's  death  Davis  spoke  and  wrote 
inaccurately  on  the  subject,  and  Lad  placed  the  bill  in  the 
hands  of  a  creditor  of  his  own,  to  put  it  in  suit.  Meanwhile, 
Simpson's  executors  began  a  proceeding  in  equity  for  the 
purpose  of  impeaching  the  bill  for  fraud,  and  praying  that 
it  might  be  delivered  up  to  them.  The  vice-chancellor 
stated  that  it  was  impossible  for  a  reasonable  being  to  draw 
any  other  reference  from  the  materials  and  evidence  before 
him  than  that  the  whole  transaction  was  fraudulent,  and 
accordingly  granted  the  relief  prayed  for. 

jj    32.      THE    RIGHT    TO    CHARGE    FOR   LOST    TIME. 

The  right  of  a  dentist  to  charge  for  time  not  actually 
spent  in  operating  upon  a  patient,  yet  set  aside  for  him  by 
appointment,  is  a  question  which  has  resulted  in  numerous 
litigations.  In  these  cases  the  court  views  the  acceptance  by 
a  patient  of  an  appointment,  for  a  specified  time,  with  a  den- 
tist, as  an  implied  contract ;  the  understood  terms  thereof 
holding  the  patient  responsible  for  such  accepted  timer 
(usually  one  hour  for  a  "  single  "  appointment,  unless  more 
time  is  specified),  if  he  voluntarily  violates  the  contract  by 
failing  to  keep  the  appointment,  without  the  consent  of  the 
dentist,  the  first  party  to  the  contract.  This  rule  is  within 
the  reason,  because  a  dentist  relies  upon  his  professional  time 
for  support,  and  if  a  patient  fails  to  keep  an  accepted  appoint- 
ment, such  time  results  in  a  pecuniary  loss  to  the  dentist,  if 
he  cannot,  owing  to  the  default  of  the  said  patient,  refill  it 
by  appointment  "with  another  patient. 

In  the  case  of  Dr.  D.  D.  Smith  v.  W.  P.  Tatham,  heard 
before  Judge  Pole,  in  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  Magistrate's  Court 
Xo.  9,  July  11th,  1891,  this  point  was  in  dispute.  The  evi- 
dence developed  the  fact  that  the  defendant  engaged  the 
plaintiff  to  perform  certain  dental  operations,  which  the  latter 
proceeded  with,  pursuing  his  usual  methods  of  operating. 

The  defendant  requested  that  the  roots  of  the  teeth  be 
filled  with  gold,  whereas  the  doctor  in  his  best  judgment  and 
opinion  deemed  it  impractical,  in  this  particular  case,  and 
therefore  refused  to  accede  to  the  request;  thereupon,  the 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  105 

defendant  left  the  chair  and  the  office,  thereby  causing  the 
loss  of  the  doctor's  time,  for  that  appointment  and  a  subse- 
quent one,  which  had  been  agreed  upon. 

The  plaintiff  claimed  that  it  was  customary  among  the 
profession,  and  that  it  was  their  right  to  follow  their  own 
judgment  in  treatments  and  operations  of  the  character  in 
dispute.  The  correctness  of  his  position  was  corroborated 
by  the  expert  testimony  of  Drs.  Turner  and  Rehfuss  ;  also 
as  to  the  usage  of  the  profession  in  charging  for  time  set  apart 
by  appointment  and  not  used,  owing  to  the  default  of  the 
patient.     Judgment  was  entered  for  the  plaintiff. 

A  dentist  brought  suit  against  a  lady  in  a  Chicago  court, 
in  1875.  The  plaintiff  charged  that  the  defendant  made  a 
series  of  appointments  with  him  and  failed  to  keep  them. 
His  claim  was  for  eighty  dollars,  charging  at  the  rate  of  two 
dollars  and  fifty  cents  per  hour.  The  plaintiff"  secured  judg- 
ment for  the  whole  amount. — Dental  Cosmos,  XIX,  110. 

In  these  cases  the  decision  of  the  court  will  rest  upon 
the  circumstances  and  evidence  produced. 

§  33.     The  Legal  Rules  Regulating  the  Amount  of  the 
Fees  Recoverable. 

A  dental  practitioner  may  legally  recover  a  fee,  the 
amount  of  which  was  fixed  by  an  express  contract ;  but  if 
no  agreement  was  made  stipulating  the  fee  to  be  received  by 
the  dentist  for  his  services,  he  is  entitled  to  recover  a  reason- 
able compensation  ;  for  it  is  a  well  settled  principle  of  law 
that,  where  one  has  used  his  skill  or  labor  for  the  benefit  of 
another,  the  law  recognizes  an  implied  promise  on  the  part 
of  the  one  to  compensate  the  other  for  his  services. 

The  legal  presumption  in  these  cases  is  that  the  defend- 
ant has  derived  some  benefit  from  the  service,  because  it  is 
an  established  rule  that,  when  no  beneficial  service  has  been 
derived  by  the  defendant,  there  shall  be  no  compensation  due 
the  plaintiff,  and  it  is  competent  for  the  latter  to  show  that 
his  work  was  properly  done,  if  that  be  disputed.  (Basten 
1 .   Butter,  7  East,  479).     On  the  other  hand,  the    defendant, 


10»5  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

to  evade  the  claim,  musl  clearly  prove  that  no  beneficial 
services  were  received  by  him,  or  that  the  service  was  not  <>f 
the  valueaa  claimed.  Daniel  Nason,  Esq.,  thus  states  the  law 
applicable  to  tins  point :  "Ifadentist  administers  chloroform 
to  a  patient  and  extracts  the  wrong  tooth,  he  cannot  recover 
for  Lis  services,  nor  can  he,  if  his  bill  has  been  increased  by 
Lis  own  mistake,  as  when  being  employed  to  extract  a  tooth 
and  insert  an  artificial  one  in  its  place,  extracts  two  and  has 
to  insert  two,  recover  for  this  additional  amount  of  work." 
It  was  decided  in  the  case  of  Kannen  v.  McMullen  (Peake's  N. 
P.  C,  Vol.  I.,  83),  "  that  no  man  can  come  into  a  court  of 
justice  and  recover  a  fee  for  the  cure  of  a  wound  of  which 
he  was  the  direct  causal.'" 

Legally,  no  limitation  is  placed  on  the  fees  recoverable 
by  a  dentist  other  than  they  be  reasonable  and  in  proportion 
to  the  amount  of  services  rendered.  "  Within  this  rule,  a 
practitioner  may  charge  more  or  less,  using  his  discretion  in 
estimating  the  value  of  the  services  he  renders;  but  the  pre- 
sumption is  that  similar  charges  are  made  for  similar  ser- 
vice^" ( Garrison V  Amer.  Sys.  Dent,,Yol.  III.,  050.)  Again, 
the  value  of  the  services  of  all  professional  men  are  not 
alike.  An  eminent  practitioner,  with  an  established  reputa- 
tion and  long  experience,  can  reasonably  demand  a  larger  fee 
than  a  less  experienced  parctitioner,  for  the  same  service,  as 
it  is  presumed  that  the  party  employed  him  with  a  knowl- 
edge of  this  circumstance. — Willeox's  Medical  Profession, 
III. 

A  court  will  not  interfere  and  reduce  a  bill,  unless  it  is 
evident  that  the  fees  charged  are  excessive  and  unjust ;  in 
such  cases,  it  is  for  the  jury  to  decide  whether  the  charges 
are  improper,  and  regulate  them  so  as  they  be  reasonable  and 
hear  a  relation  to  the  services  rendered.  In  New  York  city, 
recently,  a  jury  reduced  a  dentist's  bill  from  8445    to   $67. 

In  the  bill  was  an  item  of  $40,  charged  for  repairing  a 
bridge  which  he  himself  had  made,  and  which  the  evidence 
showed  had  always  given  trouble.  The  jury  deemed  this 
charge — and,  in  fact,  the  whole  hill— unjust,  and  amended  it 
accordingly. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  107 

Again,  when  the  payment  of  the  bill  is  refused,  the 
dental  practitioner  is  not  restricted  to  items  and  thereby  pre- 
vented from  showing  what  his  services  were  reasonably  worth, 
and  thus  recovering  a  larger  fee  than  that  charged.  (Wil- 
liams v.  Glenny,  1(3  K  Y.,  39.) 

The  variety  of  circumstances — as  the  nature  of  the 
disease,  the  amount  of  knowledge  and  skill  required  in  the 
treatment,  the  circumstances  under  which  the  services  were 
rendered,  the  difficulties  and  expenses  attending  them,  and 
the  responsibilities  devolving  upon  him- — regulate  the  value 
of  the  services  of  a  professional  man.  (Commissioners  v. 
Chambers,  57  Ind.,  409  ;  Corns,  v.  Brewington,  74  Ind.,  7.) 

A  dentist  may  hold  a  set  of  artificial  teeth  made  or  re- 
paired by  him  as  a  securit}r  for  his  reasonable  charges ;  this 
lien  he  will  waive  by  parting  with  posession,  or  by  entering 
into  any  contract  inconsistent  with  its  continuance,  as,  for 
instance,  when  he  agrees  to  give  credit  for  a  stipulated  time. 
(Edwards  or  Bailmerts,  §§  420-425). 

§  34.  LIABILITY  OF  A  THIRD  PARTY  WHO  REQUESTS  THE  SERVICES 
OP  A  DENTIST  FOR  THE  BENEFIT  OF  ANOTHER. 

When  a  person  calls  a  dental  surgeon  to  perform  a  ser- 
vice for  the  sole  benefit  of  a  third  person,  and  he  himself 
does  not  expect  to  derive  any  benefit  therefrom,  nor  pay  for 
the  service  rendered,  the  law  will  not  imply  an  employment  by 
the  party  making  the  request,  and  as  there  is  no  implied 
promise  to  pay  therefor,  he  cannot  be  held  liable  for  the  same. 
(Field's  Medico-Legal  Guide,  §  114 ;  Abbot,  Trial  Ev.,  358  ; 
Boyd  v.  Sappington,  4  Watts  Rep.,  247;  Norris  v.  Dodge,  23 
Ind.,  190.) 

It  has  been  held,  in  an  action  in  Court,  that  in  order  to 
recover  on  the  ground  of  a  request,  it  must  appear  that  the 
person  making  it  intended  to  pay  for  the  services,  and  that 
both  parties  understood  it  in  that  way.  (Smith  v.  Watson, 
14  Vt,  332;  Boyd  /•.  Sappington,  4  Watts,  Pa.,  247;  Wil- 
liams v.  Breckell, 37  Miss.,  1582  ;  Dunbar  ik  Williams,  10  John, 
.V.  Y.,  249  ;  Field's  Medico- Legal  Guide,  §  114.) 


108  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

"The  third  person  cannot  be  held  liable,  unless  the  rela- 
tion between  him  and  the  person  operated  upon  is  that  of 
parent  and  child,  guardian  and  ward,  husband  and  wife — 

the  domestic  relation.''     (A.  D.  Lauer.  I 

The  advice  to  the  dental  practitioner  is  not  to  hold  a 
claim  against  one  person  tor  services  to  another  upon  a  mere 
request — a  promise  to  pay — but  to  obtain  in  some  manner  an 
acknowledgment  of  a  liability  or  promise  to  pay. 

§  35.    CLAIMS   )0R  SERVICES  FOR  MARRIED  WOMEN. 

A  married  woman  is  not  liable  for  necessities  furnished 
her,  unless  she  makes  a  contract  therefor  in  her  own  behalf, 
because  the  presumption  is  that,  when  she  obtains  necessities 
for  the  family  of  her  husband  and  herself,  she  is  acting  as 
his  agent,  and  on  the  husband  lies  the  primary  duty  of  fur- 
nishing and  paying  for  them. 

However,  the  wife  may  be  the  financially  responsible 
party  for  the  services  rendered,  in  consideration  of  her  ex- 
press promise  binding  her  separate  estate  for  the  payment 
thereof. 

In  a  case — Gilman  v.  Andrus,  28  Vt.,  241 — it  was  decided, 
"  that  artificial  teeth  must  be  considered  necessities,  and  for 
that  reason  the  husband  is  liable  for  payment  when  they 
have  been  furnished  his  wife,  particularly  if  she  retains 
them  with  his  knowledge,  and  he  has  given  the  dentist  who 
supplied  them  reason  to  believe,  from  previous  conversation 
with  him,  that  she  was  authorized  to  contract  for  them. 

Even  under  the  Act  of  1887,  giving  a  married  woman 
control  of  the  disposition  of  her  own  property,  the  husband 
(in  an  action  for  necessaries)  must  be  joined  in  the  suit.  A 
dental  or  medical  practitioner  cannot  recover  from  the  hus- 
band for  services  rendered  the  wife,  if  the  husband  shows 
to  the  satisfaction  of  the  jury  that  he  gave  notice  to  the 
plaintiff  that  he  would  not  be  responsible,  and  that  he  had 
secured  the  services  of  another;  for  while  the  law  holds  him 
liable  for  such  services  to  his  wife,  it  gives  him  the  choice 
of  offering  any  competent  practitioner  he  sees  fit.  (Remick 
v.  Crabtree,  21  W.  X.  C,  31.) 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  109 

§  36.    LIABILITY  OF  MINORS  FOR  SERVICES. 

Generally,  a  minor  cannot  be  held  liable  for  services  for 
which  he  contracts,  but,  under  certain  circumstances,  the  law 
allows  exceptions,  when  their  contracts  are  for  necessaries 
furnished  him.  As  a  minor  cannot  bind  himself  for  neces- 
saries when  he  has  a  parent  or  guardian  who  supplies  his 
wants,  it  is  incumbent  upon  those  who  intend  to  furnish 
necessaries  to  the  minor,  to  apply  to  such  guardian  or  parent 
and  contract  with  him. 

If,  upon  inquiry,  it  is  shown  that  the  minor  is  not  pro- 
vided by  his  parents  or  friends  with  the  necessaries,  a 
stranger  may  supply  the  necessaries  proper  for  him. 

In  case  of  utter  desertion  of  a  child  by  his  father,  he 
would  be  liable  for  necessaries  supplied  to  him  by  another 
person.  And  a  ward  can  be  furnished  with  necessaries  upon 
his  own  contract,  if  his  guardian  cannot  or  will  not  furnish 
them  for  him.  (Guthrie  v.  Murphy,  4  Watts,  80 ;  Story,  on 
Contracts,  sec.  87  ;  Williams,  on  Physicians,  47  ;  Johnson  v. 
Sims,  6  Wand  S.,  80  ;  Newport  v.  Cooke,  2  Ashmead,  332,  etc.) 

An  infant  is  liable  for  services  performed  by  a  dentist. 
(Lee  v.  Griffin,  E.  B.  and  S.,  272.) 

And  the  filling  of  teeth  for  their  preservation,  to  give 
relief  from  pain  and  prevent  its  recurrence,  is  a  necessary 
for  which  an  infant  is  liable. 

According  to  the  statutes  of  Pennsylvania,  males  and 
females  who  are  under  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  are  con- 
sidered minors. 

§  37.    THE  BOOK-ACCOUNTS  OF  DENTISTS. 

To  the  book-accounts  of  the  dental  practitioner  much 
legal  importance  is  attached,  in  proving  his  claims  for  ser- 
vices. 

It  is  of  practical  consequence  that  the  entries  be  made 
in  the  day-book,  on  the  same  day  the  service  is  rendered,  al- 
though some  authorities  allow  a  short  grace  after  the  day. 
The  account  should  be  charged  to  the  person  who  is  to  pay 
it,  and  give  dates,  items,  and  prices.     The  charges  should 


110  DENTAL    JURI8PEUDBM(  B. 

not  be  lumped,  but  as  specific  as  possible  ;  they  should  not 
make  one  charge  for  two  or  more  fillings,  or  for  several 
treatments,  but  should  be  distinctly  itemized.  If  this  plan 
is  not  carried  out,  the  books  are  imperfect,  and,  if  admissible 
at  all,  are  unsatisfactory  in  proving  the  value  of  the  services 
charged. 

Various  methods  are  used  by  dentists,  wherein  day- 
book and  ledger  are  combined,  and  various  marks  and  signs 
are  substituted  for  plain  language,  to  represent  a  certain  class 
of  operations.  These  methods  are  viewed  with  disfavor  by 
the  court  and  juries,  and  are  sometimes  overruled  and  ex- 
cluded as  evidence. 

As  stated,  it  is  the  best  practice  to  enter  the  charge  for 
the  service  at  once,  because  it  is  of  importance  to  do  so  in  case 
the  debtor  should  happen  to  die.  Under  these  circumstances, 
the  dentist  would  have  to  prove  the  value  of  his  services  by 
other  persons,  as  no  reliance  could  be  placed  in  the  books. 
Should  the  dentist  produce  his  book,  and  it  was  properly  con- 
ducted, with  the  regular  methods  of  entry,  he  would  have  little 
difficulty  in  collecting  his  claim.  According  to  the  Act  of 
1869,  a  plrysician  is  not  bound  to  prove  his  claim  by  his 
books.  If  the  debtor  is  living,  under  this  Act  the  physician 
can  be  a  witness  himself  to  prove  his  claim  in  any  way;  but 
in  case  his  debtor  is  dead,  he  is  confined  to  his  book-account 
and  other  testimony  besides  his  own.  (Williams,  on  Phy- 
sicians, etc.,  p.  50-52.) 

It  was  held  that  this  Act  applies  as  well  to  the  dental 
practitioner. 

Richard  Williams  says :  "  If  proper  books  are  kept,  an 
advantage  will  be  gained  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  under 
its  affidavit-at-defense  law." 

That  law  authorizes  copies  of  book-accounts  to  be  filed 
in  suits  in  court,  and  thereupon  the  defendant  will  be  re- 
quired to  file  an  affidavit,  stating  the  grounds  of  his  defense. 
If  no  such  book  is  kept,  or  if  such  book  has  not  been 
properly  kept,  the  result  may  be  that  the  claimant  will 
have  to  prove  his  claim  before  a  jury.  Much  time  elapses 
before  a  claimant  can  succeed  in  having  his  case  brought  to 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  Ill 

trial,  and  it  will  be  greatly  to  the  interest  to  dental  practi- 
tioners with  large  practices  to  avoid,  if  possible,  such  a  re- 
sult, by  keeping  books  that  will  stand  the  test  of  judicial 
scrutiny. 

A  case  in  point  showing  the  difficulties  attendant  upon 
the  collection  of  a  bill  by  suit,  is  illustrated  in  the  settle- 
ment of  the  estate  of  Ambrose  White,  11  Phila.  Rep.,  100. 
Here  a  claim  was  presented  for  services  as  a  dentist  to  the 
decedent.  It  was  claimed  that  the  bill  was  false  and  un- 
founded, and,  to  prove  the  charges  against  decedent  in  his 
book  of  original  entries,  both  his  reputation  for  truth  and 
veracity,  and  of  his  books  of  original  entry  for  correctness 
and  fair  dealing,  were  attacked,  and  the  claim  was  disal- 
lowed. The  Orphans'  Court  held  that  particular  instances  of 
irregularity  and  false  charges  may  be  proven,  to  discredit  tin- 
books  and  show  them  unreliable. 

§  38.       PARTNERSHIPS. 

The  general  laws  of  partnership  are  applicable  to  part- 
nership agreements  which  are  formed  between  dentists. 

In  the  formation  of  a  partnership,  no  especial  formal- 
ities need  be  observed,  nor  must  the  agreement  necessarily 
be  in  writing,  unless  when  an  unequal  division  of  the  profits 
is  to  be  made,  when  the  terms  of  partnership  must  be  drawn 
up,  otherwise  the  legal  presumption  is  that  the  partners 
share  equally  in  the  profits  and  losses. 

Partners  must  exercise  good  faith  in  all  of  their  deal- 
ings in  the  firm's  name ;  a  willful  and  continued  neglect  of 
business,  immoral  conduct  materially  affecting  the  business, 
gross  misconduct  in  reference  to  partnership  matters,  or  per- 
manent physical  incapacity,  are  just  grounds  for  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  partnership. 

A  partnership  may  also  be  dissolved  by  mutual  consent, 
or  by  the  expiration  of  the  time  in  which  it  was  to  continue 

Daniel  Naaon,  Esq.,  cites  an  interesting  discussion  as  to 
the  right  to  use  the  firm-name  after  dissolution,  viz. :  The 
parties  to  this  suit  practiced  dentistry  under  the  firm-name 
of  "  Morgan  k  Schuyler,*'  in  the  city  of  Rochester.     (79  N. 


112  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

Y.,  490.)  Having  dissolved  by  mutual  consent,  the  defend, 
ant  purchased  certain  partnership  property,  assumed  the 
rent,  and  continued  to  occupy  the  rooms  of  the  late  firm- 
It  was  understood  that  the  plaintiff  was  to  open  another 
office  in  the  same  city,  and  this  he  did.  After  the  dissolution . 
the  plaintiff  caused  his  name  to  be  removed  from  the  sign 
containing  the  firm's  name  ;  but  the  defendant  replaced  it  as 
nearly  as  possible  as  before,  and  then  placed  over  the  firm- 
name,  on  the  sign,  the  following:  "  B.  F.  Schuyler,  successor 
to,"  in  letters  so  small  and  in  such  a  way  as  to  be  almost  im- 
perceptible. This  action  was  brought  to  restrain  the  defend- 
ant from  using  the  plaintiff's  name  on  signs,  circulars,  or 
advertisements,  or  from  declaring  himself  to  be  the  suc- 
cessor of  the  late  firm  of  Morgan  &  Schuyler.  A  judgment 
was  directed  granting  the  plaintiff  the  relief  sought,  and  a 
reference  was  also  directed  to  ascertain  his  damages.  This 
judgment  was  sustained  by  the  Court  of  Appeals.  Judge 
Danforth,  in  giving  the  opinion  of  that  Court,  said :  "  There 
was  nothing  in  the  former  relations  of  the  parties,  or 
the  express  terms  of  the  agreement  of  dissolution,  which 
gave  to  either  one  the  good-will  of  the  business  hitherto 
conducted  by  them  under  the  firm-name  of  '  Morgan  & 
Schuyler,'  nor  was  either  in  any  way  restrained  from  con- 
tinuing the  practice  of  his  profession  on  his  own  account  in 
any  place.  Yet  the  defendant  became  the  equitable  assignee 
of  the  unexpired  term  of  the  lease  under  which  the  firm  held 
its  place  of  business,  and  the  sole  owner  of  certain  partner- 
ship property  and  fixtures.  He  thereby  acquired  an  advant- 
age over  the  plaintiff,  for  he  had  the  exclusive  right  to 
occupy  the  rooms  of  the  late  firm,  and  as  an  incident  thereto, 
the  benefit  of  that  good-will  which  Lord  Eldon  defines  '  as 
the  probability  that  the  old  customers  will  resort  to  the  old 
place.'  The  extent  of  this  depends  partly  on  the  force  of 
habit,  and  in  the  case  of  such  business  as  had  been  carried 
on  by  these  parties,  in  some  degree,  on  the  satisfaction  which 
the  patient  had  received  at  the  hands  of  one  or  the  other 
member  of  the  firm  ;  but  it  is  after  all  a  very  different  theme 
from  the  good-will  which  may  be  said  to  attach  to  the  per- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  113 

*on  of  a  professional  man,  as  the  result  of  confidence  in  his 
skill  and  ability.  The  first  is  of  no  value  except  to  the 
occupant  of  the  place,  while  the  latter  is  inseperable  from 
the  person  and  follows  its  possessor  wherever  he  goes.  So 
far  as  it  belonged  to  the  plaintiff  it  could  not  have  been 
transferred  to  the  defendant;  but  the  advantage  secured  to 
him,  as  the  occupant  of  the  old  place  of  business,  would 
doubtless  have  been  rendered  more  valuable  if  the  plaintiff" 
had  retired,  not  only  from  the  firm,  but  from  the  practice  of 
his  art.  This,  however,  he  not  only  did  not  undertake  to 
do,  but  it  was  understood  by  both  parties  at  the  time  of 
dissolution  that  the  plaintiff  was  at  once  to  open  an  office, 
and  carry  on  his  business  of  dentistry  in  the  same  city. 

This  fact  precludes  the  idea  that  the  defendant  acquired 
any  good-will  in  the  business,  except  such  as  was  incident  to 
his  sole  ownership  of  the  property  mentioned  in  the  agree- 
ment. It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  it  was  not  the  intention 
of  the  parties  that  the  defendant  should,  in  the  conduct  of 
his  business,  in  any  manner  use  the  plaintiff's  name,  either 
ill  combination  with  his  own,  as  '  Morgan  &  Schuyler,'  or 
in  subservience  to  it,  by  declaring  himself  the  '  successor  ' 
to  that  firm.  It  is  not  claimed  that  there  is  any  express 
contract  to  that  effect,  and  none  can  be  implied,  either  from 
the  language  of  the  agreement  actually  made,  or  from  any 
fact  or  circumstance  connected  with  it.  *****  * 
Xor  has  the  defendant  any  better  right  to  declare  himself 
the 'successor' of  the  firm  of  'Morgan  &  Schuyler.'  In  so 
doing,  he  represents  not  only  that  the  firm  is  extinguished, 
but  that  his  co-member  has  quit,  or  retired  from  business. 
The  latter,  therefore,  will  lose  patronage  to  which  he  is 
entitled,  for  those  persons  who  might  otherwise  resort  to 
him  for  assistance,  will  be  misled  into  supposing  that  his 
-«:ivices  cannot  be  obtained.  In  either  aspect  the  plaintiff's 
'•use  was  made  out.  It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  the 
defendant  may  not  avail  himself  of  the  full  value  of  his  pur- 
chase,and  to  that  end, by  signs  or  advertisements,  refresh  the 
memory  of  those  customers  who  had  acquired  a  preference 
for  the  particular  locality  in  which  he  continues  his  business, 


114  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

or  recall  to  their  attention  the  circumstance  to  which  thai 
performance  may  be  due.  He  may  lawfully  describe  the 
rooms  as  'formerly  occupied  by  Morgan  &  Schuyler,'  or 
himself  as  'formerly/  or  'late3  of  that  firm,  by  these  or 
other  phrases.  He  would  thus  state  simply  facts  belonging 
to  his  own  life  or  incident  to  the  office,  as  much  so  as  to  the 
time  or  place  of  his  birth,  the  name  of  his  father  or  instruc- 
tor, or  the  college  from  which  he  graduated,  or  the  time 
when  the  premises  were  first  used  in  the  practice  of  his  call- 
ing.    All  this  might  be  done  in  good  faith." 

Whether  a  partnership  exists  in  a  particular  case  ie  a 
mixed  question  of  law  and  fact.  The  partnership  may  last 
for  any  time  agreed  upon  by  the  partners.  It  is  termin- 
able at  will,  unless  it  has  been  agreed  that,  it  will  endure  for 
a  specified  period. 

The  shares  of  partners  are  prima  facie  equal.  Inequality 
must  be  proven  by  evidence.  Each  member  of  a  partnership 
is  entitled  to  take  a  share  in  its  management,  unless,  as  is 
frequently  the  case,  one  member  is  appointed  managing 
partner. 

A  partnership  at  will  is  dissolved  by  the  termination  of 
the  will  or  agreement  of  the  partnership  share.  After  dissolu- 
tion, the  persons  who  constituted  the  partnership  become 
tenants  in  common  of  the  partnership  property  until  the 
division  of  assets,  unless  any  other  provision  is  made  by 
agreement.  The  partnership  debts  are  paid  out  of  the 
partnership  assets,  and  the  private  debts  out  of  the  private- 
assets. 

£  38.   CONTRACTS  BETWEEN  PRECEPTOR  AND  PUPIL. 

Daniel  Nason,  Esq.,  submitted  the  following  forms  of 
contract,  by  request,  to  the  New  York  Dental  Society.  * 

AGREEMENT,  Made  in  the of ,  County  of 

,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  this day  of. 

189...,  between of  the of. , 

County  of in  the  State  of  New  York,  party  of 

*  These  contracts  were  drawn  by  the  partner  of  Daniel  Nason,  Esq. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  115 

the  first  part,  and of  the of 

County  of ,  in  the  State  of ,  party  of  the 

second  part. 

WITNESSETH,    That 

Whereas,  the  said  party  of  the  first  part  by  profession  a 
dentist,  and  duly  qualified  as  such  under  the  law  of  the  State 
of  New  York  to  practice  his  said  profession  of  dentistry 
within  said  State,  is  desirous  of  associating  with  himself  as  a 

the  said  party  of  the  second  part,  to  the  end 

that  he  may  teach,  instruct,  and  perfect  the  said  party  of  the 
second  part  in  the  practice  and  art  of  said  profession  of  den- 
tistry, and  that  the  said  party  of  the  second  part  may  assist 
and  co-operate  with  him  in  the  practice  of  his  said  art  or 
profession  ;  and  whereas,  the  said  party  of  the  second  part  is 
desirous  of  associating  himself  with  the  said  party  of  the 
first  part ;  and  whereas,  the  said  party  of  the  first  part  now 
has  a  large  and  extended  practice  in  his  art  or  profession  of 
dentistry,  and  many  patients  who  resort  to  him  for  treatment 
in  his  said  art  or  profession  from  the  region  in  and  about  the 

of extending  to  a  distance  of  many  miles 

in  all  directions  therefrom,  to  wit:  to  the  distance  in   all 

directions  of  about miles;  and  both  the  parties  hereto 

are  desirous  that  on  the  dissolution  of  the  relationship  cre- 
ated between  the  parties  hereto  by  this  agreement,  there  should 
be  no  conflict  of  interests  between  the  said  parties  in  the 
practice  of  their  profession  or  art  of  dentistry.  Now,  this 
Agreement  witnesseth,  that  in  consideration  of  the  mutual 
promises  hereinafter  set  forth,  and  of  the  sum  of  one  dollar 
by  the  party  of  the  first  part  to  the  party  of  the  second  part 
this  day  in  hand  paid,  the  receipt  whereof  is  hereby  acknowl- 
edged, it  is  mutually  promised,  covenanted,  and  agreed  by 
and  between  the  parties  hereto. 

I.  That  on  the  terms  and  conditions  in  a  memorandum 
hereto  annexed,  expressed,  the  party  of  the  first  part  will  well 
and  properly,  in  the  manner  and  according  to  the  customs 
and  usages  in  that  respect  now  practiced  in  the  art  or  pro- 
fession of  dentistry,  teach,  instruct  and  perfect  the  party  of 


116  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

the  second  part  in  the  art,  practice,  and  profession  of  den- 
tistry for  and  during  the  period  of .■ 

from  the  date  first  above  written. 

II.  That,  on  the  terms  and  conditions  in  a  memorandum 
hereto  annexed,  expressed,  the  party  of  the  second  part  will 

well  and  faithfully,  for  and  during  the  period  of. 

from  the  date  first  above  written,  the  said  party  of  the 
first  part  assist  in,  and  learn  from  him,  the  said  art,  prac- 
tice, and  profession  of  dentistry,  in  the  manner  and  accord- 
ing to  the  customs  and  usages  in  that  respect  now  prac- 
ticed in  the  art  or  profession  of  dentistry  ;  and  the  said  party 
of  the  second  part  hereby  expressly  promises  and  agrees,  that 
during  the  continuance  of,  or  upon  the  dissolution  in  any  way, 
of  the  relationship,  between  the  parties  hereto  by  this  agree- 
ment created,  he  will  not  practice  or  follow  the  art  or  pro- 
fession of  dentistry  in  the of in  the  State 

of  New  York,  or  within  the  distance  of miles  from  said 

of ,  while  the  said  party  of  the  first 

part  shall  practice  or  follow  the  said  art  or  profession  of  den- 
tistry in  the  said of ,  or  within 

miles  thereof;  saving  and  excepting  such  time  as  he,  the 
said  party  of  the  second  part,  may  so  practice  or  follow  the 
art  or  profession  of  dentistry  by  the  written  consent  of,  and 
as  assistant  to,  or  pupil  of,  the  said  party  of  the  first  part. 

III.  That  the  terms  and  conditions  in  the  memorandum 
hereto  annexed,  expressed,  shall  be  taken  as  a  part  of  this 
agreement  the  same  as  if  they  had  herein  been  set  forth  in 
full. 

In  Witness  Whereof  we  have  hereunto  set  our  hands 
and  affixed  our  seals  the  day  and  place  first  above  written. 

I>s.] 

[L.S.] 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  117 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK, 


County  of 

On  the day  of 189 . . . ,  before  me  per- 
sonally came to  me  personally 

known,  and  known  to  me  to  be  the  persons  mentioned  and 
described  in  the  foregoing  instrument  and  who  executed  the 
same,  and  they  thereupon  severally  acknowledged  to  me  that 
they  had  executed  the  same  for  the  intents  and  purposes 
therein  expressed. 

Memorandum  mentioned  and  referred  to  in  the  foregoing 
instrument. 

The  terms  and  conditions  of  the  agreement  in  the  fore- 
going instrument  other  than  those  therein  expressed  are  : 


CONTRACT    FOR   MINORS. 

WHEREAS,  at request dentist  of 

the of ,  County  of ,  in  the 

State  of  New  York,  as  the  party  of  the  first  part,  on  the 

day  of ,  189...,  entered  into  a  certain 

agreement  in  writing  with  one ....of  the 

of ,  County  of. ,  in  the  State 

of ,  an  infant,  as  party  of  the  second  part, 

whereby  among  other  things  the  said  party  of  the  first  part, 
subject  to  the  terms  and  conditions  in  said  agreement,  agreed 

to  teach,  instruct,  and  perfect,  during  the  period  of 

from  the  date  of  said  agreement,  in  the  art,  practice  and 
profession  of  dentistry,  the  said  party  of  the  second  part ; 
and  the  said  party  of  the  second  part  thereby,  among  other 
things,  for  a  like  period,  and  subject  to  the  same  terms  and 
conditions,  agreed  to,  well  and  faithfully,  the  said  party  of 
the  first  part,  assist  in,  and  learn   from  him,  the  said  art, 


118  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

practice  and  profession  of  dentistry, and  promised  and  agreed 
that  he,  the  said  party  of  the  second  part,  would  not,  during 
the  continuance  of  or  upon  the  dissolution,  in  any  manner, 
of  the  relationship  created  between  the  parties  thereto  by 
said  agreement,  practice  or  follow  the  art  or  profession  of 

dentistry    in   the of ,   in    the  State  of 

New  York,  or  within   the  distance  of miles  from  said 

of while   the  said  party  of  the    first 

part  should  practice  or  follow  the  profession  of  dentistry  in 

The  said of or  within miles  thereof, 

saving  and  excepting  such  time  as  he,  the  said  party  of  the 
second  part  should  so  practice  or  follow  the  art  or  profession 
of  dentistry  by  the  written  consent  of,  and  as  the  assistant  to, 
or  pupil  of,  the  said  party  of  the  first  part.  Now,  therefore, 
Know  All  Men  by  These  Presents,  That  in  considera- 
tion of  the  said having  at request 

entered  into  the  agreement  above  set  forth,  and  in  considera- 
tion of  one  dollar  to in  hand  by  the  said 

paid  on  the  ensealing  and  delivery  of  these  presents,  the  re- 
ceipt of  which  is  hereby  acknowledged 

held  and  firmly  bound  unto 

of  the of ,  in  the  State  of  New  York, 

in   the  sum    of dollars,   lawful    money  of  the 

United  States  of  America,  to  be  paid  as  liquidated  damages 

and  not  as  a  penalty,  to  the  said , , 

his  executors,  administrators,  or  assigns,  for  which  payment 

well  and  truly  to  be  made bind 

heirs,  executors,  and  administrators,  firmly  by  these  presents. 

Sealed  with seal and  dated  the 

day  of ,189... 

The  Condition  of  the  Above  Obligation  Is  Such, 
that  if ,  an  infant,  hereinabove  men- 
tioned and  described,  shall  well  and  truly  perform,  accord- 
ing to  the  true  intent  and  meaning  thereof,  all  the  agree- 
ments and  promises  by  him,  in  the  said  agreement  herein- 
before mentioned  and  described,  agreed  and  promised  to  be 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  119 

performed,  then  the  above  obligation  to  be  void,  otherwise 
to  remain  in  full  force  and  virtue. 


Signed,  sealed  and  delivered  in  presence  of 


.[L.  S.] 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK,      ) 

-  ss 
County  of I 

On  the day  of 189...,  before 

me  personally  came to  me  per- 
sonally known  and  known  to  me  to  be  the  person  mentioned 
and  described  in  the  foregoing  instrument, and  who  executed 
the  same,  and.., thereupon acknowl- 
edged to  me  that had  executed  the  same 

for  the  intents  and  purposes  therein  expressed. — 1ST.  Y. 
Trans.,  Items  of  Interest. 

§   39.       THE  LEGAL  RELATIONS  OF  A  DENTIST  AND  HIS  ASSISTANT. 

The  law  recognizes  certain  relations  existing  between  the 
dentist  and  his  assistant,  and,  wThen  necessary,  protects  the 
professional  rights  of  the  former  from  invasion  by  the  latter. 

As  a  general  rule,  they  are  governed  by  the  ordinary 
law  of  master  and  servant. 

In  reference  to  the  following  legal  propositions,  by  an 
assistant  is  implied  one  who  aids  the  dentist  in  his  profes- 
sional duties  and  has  not  complied  with  the  statutory  enact- 
ments, in  contra-distinction  to  the  assistant  who  has  received 
a  diploma  or  fulfilled  the  requirements  necessary  to  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  in  the  state  or  county  in  which  he  practices 
as  an  assistant.  In  various  states  the  dental  statutes  have 
certain  clauses  especially  inserted  applying  to  the  assistant, 
stating  the  qualifications  necessary  to  be  possessed  by  him  and 
the  regulations  to  be  observed.  In  others,  this  is  not  speci- 
fied in  the  statutes. 


120  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

For  instance,  in  the  New  Jersev  Btatutes,  no  reference  ie 

made  to  the  assistant,  and  according  to  the  new  laws  he  is 
required  to  possess  the  same  qualifications  as  a  regular  prac- 
titioner. He  must  possess  a  diploma  from  a  recognized  and 
reputable  dental  college  in  addition  to  passing  the  examination 
of  the  State  Board  of  Examiners.  This  view  has  been  accepted 
as  the  correct  interpretation  of  these  statutes,  because  at  the 
present  time  a  New  Jersey  dentist  will  not  engage  an  assistant . 
unless  he  possesses  these  qualifications  or  has  fulfilled  the  ne- 
cessary requirements.  This  is  obvious,  because  the  assistant 
performs  the  duties  of  a  regular  practitioner  ;  and  on  behalf 
of  his  employer  accepts  from  the  patient  a  fee  for  his  services, 
the  same  as  though  he  were  his  own  master.  As  he  usually 
receives  from  his  employer  a  salary  for  his  services,  in  no 
wise  can  it  be  construed  otherwise  than  that  he  is  a  regular 
practitioner,  but  subject  to  the  personal  will  of  his  employer, 
of  which  no  cognizance  can  be  taken  by  the  public  or  others. 

Nothing  in  these  statutes  can  be  construed  to  prevent  a 
student  or  other  person  from  performing  the  mechanical  opera- 
tions (for  definitions  see  §  38)  in  the  laboratory  of  a  dentist. 
Again,  under  the  direct  supervision  of  his  preceptor,  a  stu- 
dent, doubtless,  may  perform  dental  operations  ;  but  the  belief 
is  that  his  preceptor  could  not  collect  a  fee  for  such  services, 
according  to  the  accepted  interpretations  of  these  statutes. 

However,  according  to  People  v.  Monroe  (4  Wend.,  200), 
«'  a  dentist  can  recover  his  fee  for  the  services  of  his  assistant, 
and  this  even  though  the  assistant  has  not  fulfilled  the  statu- 
tory requirements." 

In  similar  prosecutions,  it  is  a  matter  of  doubt  whether 
this  decision  would  be  recognized  as  lawful  or  influence  the 
result  of  the  case,  especially  if  the  assistant  has  failed  to  ful- 
fill the  statutory  requirements. 

When  a  dentist  allows  his  assistant  to  attend  regular!  y 
to  his  practice  and  gives  him  authority  to  enter  into  express 
or  implied  contracts  with  his  patients,  lie  is  held  liable  for 
all  such  contracts. 

Again,  where  an  assistant  usually  orders  drugs  or  dental 
materials  on  credit,  and  the  dentist  usually  pays  for  them,  the 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  121 

dentist  will  be  held  liable  to  pay  for  any  goods  of  a  similar 
character,  which  the  assistant  may  obtain  on  credit  for  his 
own  use.     (Niekson  v.  Brohan,  10  Mod.,  109.) 

A  dentist  will  be  held  liable  in  damages  for  any  injury 
his  assistant,  acting  within  the  scope  of  his  employment, 
does  a  patient  through  want  of  skill,  or  carelessness  and  negli- 
gence on  his  part.  (Hancke  v.  Hopper,  7  C.  &  P.,  81.)  The  law 
protects  the  dental  practitioner  from  his  assistant  injuring 
his  practice,  or  from  deriving  any  prestige,  by  imitating  the 
cards  and  signs  of  his  employer.  On  this  point,  Daniel  Nason, 
Esq.,  cites  the  facts  of  the  case  of  Colton  v.  Thomas,  2  Brews., 
308,  as  follows  :  "  The  plaintiff  purchased  of  Dr.  Gardner  T. 
Colton,  of  New  York,  the  right  to  use  the  name,  "Colton 
Dental  Association,"  in  connection  with  the  use  of  nitrous 
oxide  gas  to  alleviate  pain  in  the  extraction  of  teeth,  and  com- 
menced practice  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia  under  the  des- 
ignation of  the  "Colton  Dental  Association."  When  the 
defendant,  who  had  been  in  his  employment,  opened  dental 
rooms  for  himself,  he  issued  cards  and  put  out  signs  very 
similar  to  those  used  by  Dr.  Colton,  with  the  addition,  how- 
ever, of  the  words,  "  formerly  operator  at,"  in  very  small  and 
almost  illegible  letters.  The  court  restrained  the  defendant 
from  using  the  cards  and  signs  complained  against,  on  the 
ground  that  such  use  was  a  fraud  upon  the  public ;  and  it 
also  restrained  the  employment  by  the  defendant  of  any 
device  by  which  the  patients  and  patrons  of  the  plantiff, 
without  the  exercise  of  excessive  care,  would  be  induced  to 
suppose  that  the  defendant's  place  of  business  was  the  place 
of  business  of  the  "Colton  Dental  Association." 

A  dentist  may  desire  to  restrain  his  assistant  from  prac- 
ticing  in  the  same  locality  as  he  does,  on  the  termination  of 
the  relations  between  them.  Some  dentists,  to  avoid  the 
possibility  of  such  occurrences  when  employing  an  assistant, 
make  with  him  what  is  known  as  a  "  contract  in  restraint  of 
trade  "  (see  §  40,  which  is  one  of  the  forms  of  this  class  of 
contracts)  ;  that  the  assistant,  by  reason  of  the  prestige  gained 
by  his  association  with  him,  and  the  advantage  of  such  loca- 


122  DENTAL    JURSIPRUDENCE. 

tion,  will  not  influence  patients  to  leave  his  former  employer, 

and  instead  en£a°;e  liis  professional  services. 

Public  policy  does  not  favor  "contracts  in  restraint  of 
trade,"  yet  they  are  valid  when  the  conditions  prescribed 
are  confined  within  certain  limitations. 

The  requisites  which  are  essential  to  the  validity  of  con- 
tracts of  this  character,  are :  First,  that  the  restraint  he  partial ; 
second,  that  it  he  reasonahle  ;  and  third,  that  the  assistanl 
receive  an  adequate  consideration  for  the  privileges  waived. 

In  the  case  of  Horner  v.  Graves  (1  Bing.,  735,  cited  by 
Daniel  Nason,  Esq.),"  the  plaintiff,  who  was  a  surgeon-den- 
tist, entered  into  a  contract  with  the  defendant,  hy  which 
the  former  agreed  to  employ  the  latter,  paying  him  for  his 
services,  for  the  term  of  five  years ;  and  in  addition  thereto, 
that  he  would  instruct  him  in  the  profession  of  a  surgeon- 
dentist.  On  the  part  of  the  defendant,  it  was  agreed,  among 
other  things,  that  he  would  faithfully  serve  the  plaintiff  as 
assistant,  and  that  he  would  not,  at  the  expiration  or  sooner 
termination  of  the  said  term  of  five  years,  provided  the 
plaintiff  was  then  living  and  practicing  his  profession,  prac- 
tice as  surgeon-dentist  at  or  within  one  hundred  miles  of  the 
city  of  York,  without  the  plaintiff's  previous  consent  in 
writing,  under  a  penalty  of  £1,000.  The  defendant  vio- 
lated the  latter  terms  of  agreement,  and  thereafter  the  plain- 
tiff brought  this  suit  to  recover  the  penalty.  Counsel  for  the 
defendant  contended  that  this  contract  was  void,  on  the  ground 
that  the  restraint  was  unreasonable,  and  the  consideration 
inadequate.  On  the  question  whether  the  restraint  was  reason- 
able or  not,  the  court  said :  "  We  do  not  see  how  a  better 
test  can  be  applied  to  the  question  whether  reasonable  or 
not,  than  by  considering  whether  the  restraint  is  such  only 
as  to  afford  a  fair  protection  to  the  interests  of  the  party  in 
favor  of  whom  it  is  given,  and  not  so  large  as  to  inter- 
fere with  the  interests  of  the  public.  Whatever  restraint  is 
larger  than  the  necessary  protection  of  the  party  can  be  of  no 
benefit  to  either ;  it  can  only  be  oppressive.  And  if  oppressive, 
it  is  in  the  eyes  of  the  law  unreasonable.  On  the  true  inspec- 
tion of  this,  it  must  strike  the  mind  of  any  man   that  a 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  123 

circle  round  York,  traced  with  a  radius  of  one  hundred 
miles,  encloses  a  much  larger  space  than  can  be  necessary  for 
the  plaintiff's  protection.  The  nature  of  the  occupation, 
which  is  one  that  requires  the  personal  presence  of  the  prac- 
titioner and  the  patient  together  at  the  same  place,  shows 
that  the  plaintiff"  has  shut  out  the  defendant  from  a  much 
wider  field  than  can  by  any  possibility  be  occupied  benefi- 
cially by  himself."    . 

On  the  question  of  the  adequacy  of  the  consideration, 
the  court  further  said :  "It  must  be  confessed  it  is  very  small 
compared  with  the  restraint  under  which  the  defendant  con- 
sents to  place  himself.  ******* 
At  the  time  of  entering  into  this  contract  he  was  at  liberty 
to  set  up  his  claim  and  endeavor  to  gain  his  livelihood  in  the 
city  of  York.  But  under  the  present  contract,  after  being 
employed  by  the  plaintiff  for  three  months  only,  and  receiv- 
ing in  consequence  no  more  than  the  sum  of  £30,  he  was  liable 
to  be  prevented  from  carrying  on  his  business  and  earning  his 
livelihood  within  the  space  comprehended  within  a  circle 
drawn  with  a  radius  of  one  hundred  miles  from  the  city  of 
York.  Surely  this  appears  a  very  slender  and  inadequate 
consideration  for  such  sacrifice." 

Cook  v.  Johnson  (47  Conn.,  175)  is  a  case  illustrating  a 
valid  contract  in  restraint  of  trade.  Here,  the  defendant 
r-old  to  the  plaintiff  his  dental  practice,  and  agreed,  for  the 
sum  of  $100,  not  to  practice  dentistry  within  a  radius  of  ten 
miles  from  Litchfield. 

There  was  no  limitation  whatever  in  regard  to  the  time 
daring  which  the  restraint  was  to  continue ;  but,  in  the  opin- 
ion of  the  court,  such  a  limitation,  under  the  circumstances, 
was  not  required ;  for  the  reason  that  there  is  a  well-settled 
distinction  between  a  general  restriction  as  to  place,  and  a 
general  restriction  as  to  time.  The  mere  fact  that  the  dura- 
tion of  the  restriction  as  to  time  is  indefinite  or  perpetual, 
will  not  of  itself  avoid  the  contract,  if  it  is  limited  as  to  place, 
and  is  reasonable  and  proper  in  all  other  respects. 


124  DENTAL    JUBISPRUDEN<  E. 

§    40.        AUTHORITY  AND  LEGALITY   OF  STATE  HOARDS. 

The  statutes  and  enactments  regulating  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  the  majority  of  the  states,  provide  for  the  ap- 
pointment by  the  Governor,  or  election  by  the  State  Dental 
Society,  of  a  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  whose  duty 
it  is  to  carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions  of 
the  statutes.  The  board  is  usually  composed  of  from  live  to 
seven  reputable  dentists,  and  they  are  commissioned  to  ex- 
amine all  applicants  who  wish  to  practice  dentistry  in  the 
State  ;  and,  furthermore,  they  are  empowered  to  grant  them  a 
certificate  of  qualification  entitling  them  to  engage  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  that  Commonwealth,  providing  the 
said  applicants  have  complied  with  the  provisions  of  the  Act. 

The  authority  and  legality  of  such  State  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers has  been  questioned,  but  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  their 
constitutionality. 

Dentistry  being  analogous  to  medicine,  the  annexed  case 
and  decisions,  in  a  medical  case  published  in  the  "Cosmos,"  is 
quoted  to  emphasize  and  support  the  views  and  conclusions 
stated  above,  viz. : 

An  opinion  was  rendered  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  January  14th,  1889,  in  the  case  of  Frank  M. 
Dent,  plaintiff  in  error,  v.  the  State  of  West  Virginia.  In 
error  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Appeals  of  the  State  of  West 
Virginia.  Dent  was  convicted  of  unlawfully  engaging  in  the 
practice  of  medicine  without  a  diploma,  in  violation  of  a 
statute  which  requires  every  practitioner  of  medicine  to  ob- 
tain a  certificate  from  the  State  Board  of  Health,  that  he  is  a 
graduate  of  a  reputable  medical  college,  or  that  he  has  prac 
ticed  medicine  in  the  State  continuously  for  ten  years,  or  that, 
he  has  been  found,  upon  examination  by  the  board  to  be  qualified 
to  practice  medicine.  Dent  appealed  the  case  to  the  State  Court 
of  Appeals,  asserting  that  the  Act  was  unconstitutional,  in- 
asmuch as  it  deprives  him  of  liberty  and  property  without 
due  process  of  law,  contrary  to  the  fourteenth  amendment  to 
the  constitution.  The  Court  of  Appeals  gave  judgment  against 
Dent,  and  this  court  affirms  that  decision. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  125 

The  court,  in  an  opinion  by  Justice  Field,  says :  "  It  is  un- 
doubtedly the  right  of  every  citizen  of  the  United  States  to 
follow  any  lawful  calling  he  may  choose,  subject  only  to  such 
restrictions  as  are  imposed  upon  all  persons  of  like  age,  sex, 
and  condition.  This  right  may,  in  many  respects,  be  con- 
sidered as  a  distinguishing  feature  of  our  republican  institu- 
tions. Here  all  vocations  are  open  to  every  one  on  like 
conditions. 

"  The  right  to  continue  the  practice  of  professions  is  often 
of  great  value,  and  cannot  be  arbitrarily  taken  away  any 
more  than  real  or  personal  property  can  ;  but  there  is  no  arbi- 
trary deprivation  of  such  rights  where  its  exercise  is  not 
permitted  because  of  a  failure  to  comply  with  conditions  im- 
posed by  the  State  for  the  protection  of  society.  The  power 
of  the  State  to  provide  for  the  general  welfare  of  its  people, 
authorizes  it  to  prescribe  all  such  regulations  as  may  be 
necessary  to  secure  the  people  against  the  consequences  of 
ignorance  and  incapacity, as  well  as  of  deception  and  fraud." 

In  this  connection  the  following  remarks  by  Judge 
McGary,  of  Washington,  in  a  paper  on  "  Are  Medical  Laws 
Constitutional,?"  published  in  "Hearth  and  Home,"  Septem- 
ber 15th,  1884,  are  worthy  of  consideration : 

"  The  State  may  doubtless  create  a  Board  of  Health,  or 
a  similar  body,  and  require  every  physician  to  register  his 
license  with  the  board,  or  in  the  office  of  the  County  Clerk, 
or  other  appropriate  place.  "But  his  right  to  practice  will 
not  depend  upon  his  registration,  as  the  right  has  been  already 
vested  and  assured  by  the  diploma  of  the  college.  And 
should  the  State  also  vest  this  Board  of  Health  with  the 
right,  and  even  the  duty,  of  examining  and  licensing  appli- 
cants, it  could  not  apply  to  those  who  held  a  license  from  the 
incorporated  colleges.  Nor  could  it  militate  against  or  in- 
validate in  any  way  the  right  of  the  colleges  to  issue  valid 
diplomas  and  licenses,  before  or  after ;  for  not  even  can  the 
State,  by  its  legislation,  divest  or  impair  a  vested  right  which 
the  colleges  already  had." 

In  Wilkins  v.  State  (Black's  Indiana  Digests,  3,652),  the 
decision  was  rendered  that:  "The  Act  of  March  7th,  1887,  to 


126  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

regulate  the  practice  of  dentistry,  prescribing  what  qualifi- 
cations a  person  who  enters  upon  the  practice  of  the  pro- 
fession shall  possess,  and  providing  for  the  issuing  of  certifi- 
cates to  applicants  by  a  Board  of  Examiners,  is  constitutional 
and  valid." 

The  court  will  take  judicial  knowledge  that  the  dental 
profession  is  one  requiring  skill,  and  that  an  unskilled  person 
may  injure  one  who  employs  him,  and  this  being  so,  the 
Legislature  may  prescribe  the  qualifications  of  those  permitted 
to  practice  the  profession. — Ibid. 

Legislative  Power. — The  Legislature  having  plenary  power 
over  the  whole  subject,  it  alone  must  be  the  judge  as  to  what 
is  wise  and  expedient, both  as  to  qualifications  required  and  as 
to  the  method  of  ascertaining  those  qualifications,  and  so  long 
as  it  keeps  within  the  constitution,  the  courts  can  exercise  no 
supervisory  power. — Ibid. 

Corporation. — The  provision  delegating  to  the  Indiana 
Dental  Association  the  naked  power  to  name  three  members 
of  the  Board  of  Examiners,  provided  for  in  said  Act,  is  not 
a  grant  of  corporate  power,  and  hence  is  not  a  violation  of 
the  constitutional  provision  forbidding  the  creation  of  a  cor- 
poration by  special  Act. — Ibid. 

Board  of  Examiners. — While  the  Board  of  Examiners  in 
some  degree  acts  judicially,  it  performs  no  judicial  duty  within 
the  meaning  of  the  constitution,  and  therefore  the  Act  is  not 
invalid,  because  it  does  not  make  such  provisions  as  would 
be  necessary  if  the  examiners  constituted  a  judicial  tribunal. 
—Ibid. 

The  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Exami- 
ners are  to  be  fixed  by  the  person  whom  the  law  has  vested 
with  authority,  and  one  who  desires  a  license  must  make 
reasonable  inquiry,  and  if  he  fails  to  do  so,  he  cannot  defend 
a  prosecution  for  practicing  without  a  license,  on  the  ground 
that  no  notice  had  been  given  him  (Black's  1881-1888  Digests 
of  Indiana). 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  127 

§    41.        THE    CONSTITUTIONALITY    OF   DENTAL  LAWS. LIABILITY 

FOR   PRACTICING   WITHOUT    A   DIPLOMA    OR  LICENSE. 

These  two  subjects  are  analogous,  and  are  treated  to- 
gether, because  a  dentist  or  alleged  dentist,  when  charged 
with  the  illegal  practice  of  dentistry,  invariably  has  recourse 
to  the  defense  of  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  statutes  regu- 
lating the  practice  of  dentistry,  if  he  cannot  fulfill  the  require- 
ments and  qualifications  of  these  statutes.  Therefore,  in 
their  relations,  the  two  subjects  sustain  an  equal  and  similar 
importance — the  one  being  dependent  upon  the  other,  is  the 
reason  of  their  amalgamation.  Consequently,  before  con- 
sidering the  statutes  and  the  penalties  prescribed  by  legisla- 
tion for  their  violation ,  it  is  a  necessity  to  show  that  the  courts 
sustain  such  laws,  for  whose  violation  it  prescribes  penalties  ; 
however,  if  the  courts  fail  to  uphold  the  statutes  and  declare 
them  illegal,  as  has  unreasonably  been  done  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  New  Hampshire  (quoted  elsewhere),  there  can  of 
course  be  no  violation  of  the  law7,  and  as  there  wrould  be  no 
legal  restrictions,  any  person  could  practice  dentistry  with- 
out being  subject  to  penalties,  the  Penal  Codes  being  also 
invalidated  by  such  a  decision. 

The  objective  point,  as  stated,  is  to  prove  the  validity 
of  the  State  enactments,  then  the  penalties  that  involve  their 
violation  can  be  shown. 

These  statutes  have  been  attacked  without  reason  or 
justification.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  empowers  the  State  Legislatures  to  enact 
such  laws  and  provisions  for  the  protection  of  the  people 
from  empiricism  in  relation  to  the  practice  of  dentistry  to 
exclude  from  practice  those  who  are  unfitted  for  it.  It  has 
been  decided  by  decisions  in  the  Supreme  Court  that,  in  the 
exercise  of  that  right,  the  Legislature  may  make  such  enact- 
ments wrhich  may  require  as  a  condition  of  the  right  to 
practice,  that  the  person  shall  obtain  a  license  ;  it  may  also 
provide  for  the  appointment  of,  or  designate  some  officer  or 
board,  to  issue  the  license  or  determine  whether  the  appli- 
cant possesses  the  qualifications  necessary  to  entitle  him  to  it, 


128  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

and  may  prescribe  the  qualifications  required,  and  how  the 
possession  of  them  by  the  applicant  ean  be  entertained.  In 
relation  to  this  subject  the  opinion  and  decision  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Minnesota  that  sustained  the  Minnesota 
law  governing  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  that  State,  in  the 
case  of  State  v.  Geert  A.  V  andersluis,  appellant,  can  be  quoted. 
[The  New  Jersey  Dental  Law  which  went  into  effect 
April  1st,  1890,  has  provisions  similar  to  the  Minnesota  law, 
viz.,  in  requiring  the  applicant  to  possess  a  diploma  from  a 
reputable  college,  and  in  addition  pass  an  examination  before 
the  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners.  The  New  Jersey 
law  has  been  criticised  as  unreasonable,  and  therefore,  if 
tested  in  the  Supreme  Court,  would  be  declared  unconstitu- 
tional ;  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Minnesota  in  the 
case  quoted  below,  certainly  has  an  important  bearing  thereon.] 

The  opinion  in  full  is,  as  follows  : 

"  That  the  Legislature  may  prescribe  such  reasonable  con- 
ditions upon  the  right  to  practice  medicine  or  law  as  will  ex- 
clude from  the  practice  those  who  are  unfitted  for  it,  is  so 
well  settled  by  decisions  of  the  courts  as  to  be  no  longer  an 
open  question.  The  power  rests  on  the  right  to  protect  the 
public  against  the  injurious  consequences  likely  to  result  from 
allowing  persons  to  practice  those  professions,  who  do  not 
possess  the  special  qualifications  essential  to  enable  the  prac- 
titioner to  practice  the  profession  with  safety  to  those  who 
employ  him.  The  same  reasons  apply  with  equal  force  to 
the  profession  of  dentistry,  which  is  but  a  branch  of  the 
medical  profession.  That,  in  the  exercise  of  that  power,  the 
Legislature  may  require  as  a  condition  of  the  right  to  practice 
that  the  person  shall  procure  a  license,  may  designate  some 
officer  or  board  to  issue  the  license  and  to  determine  whether 
an  applicant  possesses  the  qualifications  required  to  entitle 
him  to  it,  and  may  prescribe,  so  far  as  can  be  done  by  a  special 
law,  what  qualifications  shall  be  required  and  how  the  pos- 
session of  them  by  the  applicant  shall  be  ascertained,  neces- 
sarily follows  from  the  power  itself. 

"It  is  for  the  Legislature  and  not  for  the  courts  to  deter- 
mine  those  things.     The  only  limit  to  the  legislative  power  to 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  129 

prescribe  conditions  to  the  right  to  practice  in  a  profession,  is 
that  they  shall  be  reasonable.  Whether  they  are  reasonable, 
that  is,  whether  the  Legislature  has  gone  beyond  the  proper 
limits  of  its  power,  the  courts  must  judge.  By  the  term 
reasonable  we  do  not  mean  expedient,  nor  do  we  mean  that 
the  conditions  must  be  such  as  the  court  would  impose  if  it 
were  called  upon  to  prescribe  what  should  be  the  conditions. 
They  are  to  be  deemed  reasonable,  where,  although  perhaps 
not  the  wisest  and  best  that  might  be  adopted,  they  are  fit 
and  appropriate  to  the  end  in  view,  to  wit,  the  protection  of 
the  public,  and  are  manifestly  adopted  in  good  faith  for  that 
purpose.  If  a  condition  should  be  clearly  arbitrary  and 
capricious,  if  no  reason  with  reference  to  the  end  in  view 
could  be  assigned  for  it,  and  especially  if  it  appeared  that  it 
must  have  been  adopted  for  some  other  purpose,  such,  for  in- 
stance, as  to  favor  or  benefit  some  person  or  class  of  persons; 
it  certainly  would  not  be  reasonable,  and  would  be  beyond 
the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  impose. 

"  In  1885,  the  Legislature  passed  an  Act  to  regulate  the 
practice  of  dentistry,  Ch.  199,  Laws  1885.  This  Act  continued 
in  force  until  it  was  superseded  and  repealed  by  Ch.  19,  Laws 
1889.  The  latter  Act  is  assailed  as  unconstitutional.  Though 
the  Act  of  1885  is  not  called  in  question,  we  think  it  well  to 
refer  to  some  of  its  provisions.  Section  1  made  it  unlawful 
for  any  person  not  at  the  passage  of  the  Act  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State,  to  commence  such  practice 
without  a  certificate  as  in  the  Act  provided.  Section  5  pro- 
vided for  the  certificate,which  was  to  be  issued  by  the  Board 
of  Examiners  provided  for  in  the  Act,  upon  a  satisfactory  ex- 
amination. Section  4  made  it  the  duty  of  every  person  at 
the  time  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  to 
within  six  months  after  the  passage  of  the  Act,  to  cause  his 
name  and  residence  or  place  of  business  to  be  registered  with 
the  board  in  a  book  to  be  kept  by  it  for  that  purpose,  pro- 
vided that  every  person  so  registered  is  a  practitioner  of  den- 
tistry and  might  continue  to  practice  as  such. 

"Chapter  19,  Laws  1889,  Section  1,  provides  that  from 
and  after  September  1st,  1889,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any 


130  KENTAL    UJRISPBUDENCE. 

person  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State, unless  he  shall  have 
first  obtained  a  certificate  of  registration  and  tiled  the  same, 
or  a  certified  copy  thereof,  with  the  District  Court  of  the 
county  of  his  residence,  as  in  the  Act  afterwards  provided. 
Sections  2  and  3  provide  for  a  Board  of  Examiners.  Section 
4  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  board  to  transfer  to  a  register,  to 
he  kept  by  it  for  that  purpose,  within  ten  days  after  the  sec- 
ond Tuesday  in  July,  1889,  the  name,  residence,  and  place  of 
business  of  each  and  every  person  who  on  the  second  Wed- 
nesday in  July,  1889,  pursuant  to  the  Act  of  1885,  shall  be 
qualified  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State,  and  who  shall 
then  be  duly  registered  on  the  books  of  the  board  created  by 
the  Act  of  1885,  and  makes  it  the  dut}7  of  the  board  to  send 
to  each  of  such  persons  a  certificate  of  his  registration. 

"It  will  be  seen  from  these  various  provisions  that  those 
qualified  to  practice  dentistry  under  the  law  of  1885  continued 
to  be  so  qualified  under  the  Act  of  1889,  including  both  those 
who  were  in  practice  at  the  date  of  the  former  Act  and  regis- 
tered as  it  required,  and  those  who  became  qualified  by  the 
examination  and  certificate  provided  by  it. 

"  Section  5  of  the  Act  of  1889,  the  provisions  of  which  fur- 
nish one  of  the  grounds  on  which  appellant  assails  the  Act 
as  unconstitutional,  provides  that  any  person  who  shall 
desire  to  begin  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  after 
September  1st,  1889,  shall  make  application  for  examination 
to  the  Board  of  Examiners,  paying  a  fee  of  ten  dollars,  and 
shall  undergo  an  examination.  The  section  further  enacts : 
'  In  order  to  be  eligible  for  such  examinations,  such  person 
shall  present  to  said  board  his  diploma  from  some  dental  col- 
lege in  good  standing,  and  shall  give  satisfactory  evidence  of 
his  right  to  the  possession  of  the  same  ;  provided  also,  that 
the  board  may  in  its  discretion  admit  to  examination  such 
other  persons  as  shall  give  satisfactory  evidence  of  having 
been  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  ten  years  prior  to 
the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  Act. 

" '  Said  board  shall  have  the  power  to  determine  the  good 
standing  of  any  college  or  colleges  from  which  such  diplomas 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  131 

may  have  been  granted.'  It  then  goes  on  to  perscribe  the 
manner,  extent,  and  subjects  of  the  examinations. 

"  What  particular  objections  of  a  constitutional  charac- 
ter, the  appellant  makes  to  this  section,  it  is  somewhat  diffi- 
cult to  tell  from  his  brief.  We  infer,  however,  that  he  claims 
the  section  to  be  objectionable  because,  no  matter  how  well 
qualified  by  learning  and  skill  or  experience  one  may  be,  he 
has  no  absolute  right  to  be  examined  by  the  board,  unless  he 
has  a  diploma  from  a  dental  college  in  good  standing,  such 
good  standing  to  be  determined  by  the  board,  and  this  he 
claims  to  be  a  discrimination  between  the  rich  and  poor,, 
because  one  may  be  pecuniarily  able  and  the  other  not  able 
to  attend  a  dental  college.  The  mere  fact  of  discrimination 
in  such  a  law  is  no  objection  to  it.  Requiring  a  certain  degree 
of  learning  and  skill  as  a  condition  of  being  allowed  to  prac- 
tice, is  discrimination  between  those  who  have  and  those  who 
have  not  that  degree  of  learning  and  skill,  between  those 
who  are  able  and  those  who  are  unable  to  acquire  it. 

"  If  there  were  discriminations  between  persons  or  classes 
upon  any  matter  not  pertinent  to  the  legitimate  purpose  of 
the  law,  to  wit,  to  secure  fitness  and  competency  in  those  who 
shall  be  permitted  to  practice,  it  would  be  objectionable.  As,. 
for  instance,  if  it  were  as  to  place  of  birth,  color,  or  religious 
belief.  The  requirement  of  a  diploma  from  some  college  or 
learned  society  in  order  to  practice  medicine,  has  been  inserted 
into  the  laws  of  many  states  and  questioned  in  but  few.  In 
Massachusetts,  a  law  required  the  practitioner  to  have  been 
licensed  by  the  Medical  Society,  or  been  graduated  a  doctor  in 
medicine  at  Harvard  University.  This  was  held  constitu- 
tional in  Hewitt  v.  Charier,  16  Pick.,  356.  The  statute  of 
Xevada  (1875)  required  a  medical  education  and  a  diploma 
from  some  regularly  chartered  medical  school.  This  was  held 
constitutional — ex  parte  Spinney,  10  Nev.,  323.  As  the  fact 
of  having  graduated  at  and  received  a  diploma  from  a  school 
or  college  devoted  to  teaching  the  particular  sciences,  medi- 
cine, surgery,  or  dentistry,  bears  directly  upon  the  person's 
qualifications  to  practice,  we  have  no  doubt  the  Legislature 
might  have  made  that  the  sole  test. 


132  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

"That  this  statute  allows,  in  the  discretion  of  the  board, 
ten  years'  practice,  prior  to  the  passage  of  the  Act,  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  diploma  of  a  college,  furnishes  no  objections 
on  constitutional  grounds  to  the  Act.  True,  it  is  asked  why 
ten  years'  practice  after  the  passage  of  the  Act  ought  not  to 
entitle  one  to  the  same  right  as  ten  years'  practice  before  its 
passage.  A  sufficient  answer  to  this  is  that  such  practice 
after  the  Act,  if  in  this  State,  would  be  in  violation  of  law, 
and  the  Legislature  surely  may  provide  against  inviting  vio- 
lations of  the  law,  and  for  that  purpose  withhold  all  benefit 
from  its  violators. 

"It  is  objected  that  it  is  left  to  the  discretion  of  the 
board  to  determine  whether  ten  years'  practice,  instead  of  a 
diploma,  shall  admit  one  to  examinations.  On  the  score  of 
expediency  some  questions  might  be  made  upon  it.  But  as 
the  Legislature  might  have  left  that  provision  out  altogether 
and  made  no  concession  to  the  requirement  that  an  applicant 
for  examination  should  have  a  diploma,  we  do  not  see  that 
any  questions  can  be  made  of  the  power  to  fix  the  period  of 
ten  years,  nor  of  the  power  to  leave  it  for  the  board  to  de- 
termine in  each  particular  case  whether  the  extent  and  char- 
acter of  the  applicant's  practice  during  the  period  has  been 
such  as  to  be  equal  as  evidence  of  his  qualifications  to  the 
possession  of  a  diploma. 

"  Section  7  reads,  '  All  persons  shall  be  said  to  be  practic- 
ing dentistry  within  the  meaning  of  this  Act,  who  shall  for  a 
fee,  or  salary,  or  other  reward  paid  either  to  himself  or  to  an- 
other person  for  operations,  or  parts  of  operations  of  any 
kind,  treat  diseases  or  lesions  of  the  human  teeth  or  jaws,  or 
correct  malpositions  thereof.  But  nothing  in  this  Act  con- 
tained shall  be  taken  to  apply  to  acts  of  bona  fide  students  of 
dentistry,  done  in  the  pursuit  of  clinical  advantages  under  the 
direct  supervision  of  a  preceptor  or  a  licensed  dentist  in  this 
State,  during  the  period  of  their  enrollment  in  a  dental 
college  and  attendance  upon  a  regular,  uninterrupted  course 
in  such  college.' 

"  It  is  claimed  that  this  shows  the  law  to  be  an  arbitrary 
measure  for  the  benefit  of  dentists,  by  giving  them  a  mo- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  133 

nopoly  to  practice  a  brunch  of  surgery  which  has  heretofore 
been  largely  carried  on  by  regular  physicians  and  surgeons. 

"  It  was  proper,  in  order  to  give  precision  to  the  law,  to 
define  what  was  meant  by  practicing  dentistry.  It  is  not, 
however,  to  be  supposed  the  Legislature  intended  to  enlarge 
the  sphere  of  the  profession.  There  may  be  diseases  of 
hurts  to  and  operations  upon  the  jaws  that  are  within  the 
legitimate  profession  both  of  the  general  surgeon  and  of  the 
dentist.  We  do  not  know  how  this  is.  But  if  it  be  so,  the 
licensed  surgeon  would  be  protected  by  his  license  in  treating 
such.  The  Act  before  us  could  hardly  be  so  construed  as  to 
limit  the  right  of  the  surgeon  under  his  license. 

"  It  is  claimed  also  that  it  discriminates  between  students 
of  dentistry,  by  allowing  them  to  operate  upon  the  teeth 
and  jaws  during  the  period  of  their  enrollment  in  a  dental 
college  and  attendance  upon  a  regular  uninterrupted  course 
in  such  college,  and  excluding  others.  The  purpose  of  this 
provision  of  the  law  is  apparent.  It  is  to  permit  to  actual 
bona  fide,  students  the  benefit  of  practical  work  under  an  in- 
structor. But  to  prevent  evasions  of  the  law  by  persons 
practicing  the  profession  under  the  pretense  of  being  students, 
the  Act  very  properly  defines  who  shall  be  regarded  as  stu- 
dents within  the  clause  allowing  them  to  perform  operations 
or  parts  of  operations.  It  is  open  to  every  student  to  bring 
himself  within  the  definition. 

"The  interpretation  of  the  clause  under  consideration 
upon  which  appellant  argues  that  it  was  intended  to  prefer 
schools  of  dentistry  within  the  State  as  against  those  out  of 
it,  is  too  narrow.  We  see  no  reason  why  a  student  in  such  a 
school,  in  another  State,  may  not  during  vacation  pursue  his 
studies  here  under  a  licensed  dentist  and  be  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  clause.  By  '  regular,  uninterrupted  course '  the 
Act  does  not  mean  a  course  in  which  there  are  no  vacations, 
such  as  all  schools  have.  To  hold  that  it  does  would  lead  to 
this  unreasonable  result:  that  the  student  even  in  a  school 
in  this  State  might  during  the  term  have  the  benefit  of 
practice  in  operations  under  a  licensed  dentist,  but  would 
have  to  BQgpend  as  Boon  ae  the  term  should  close. 


134  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

"The  provisions  and  requirements  of  the  law  are  un- 
doubtedly rigorous.  They  ought  to  be  in  any  law  aiming  to 
protect  the  public  against  ignorance  and  incompetency  in  so 
important  a  profession  as  the  medical  profession  in  any  of  its 
branches.  "We  see  nothing  in  the  provisions  of  this  law  that 
was  not  clearly  inserted  by  the  Legislature  in  good  faith,  to 
effect  the  end  in  view.  The  law  is  valid.  Judgment  af- 
firmed."— Dental  Cosmos. 

In  the  case  of  George  Wilkina  p.  The  State  of  Indiana, 
the  Supreme  Court  of  that  State,  on  March  2nd,  1888,  rendered 
its  decision,  affirming  the  court  below  and  sustaining  the  con- 
stitutionality of  the  Act  regulating  the  practice  of  dentistry. 

The  plaintiff  in  error,  we  are  informed  by  Dr.  Chap- 
pell,  Secretary  of  the  Indiana  State  Board  of  Dental  Exam- 
iners, began  practice  at  Marion  in  December,  1886,  and  was 
indicted  in  the  Grant  Circuit  Court  for  failing  to  register, 
under  the  law  which  went  into  effect  August  1st,  1887.  On 
the  trial,  he  pleaded  the  possession  of  a  diploma  from  the 
Delavan  College  (the  Board  of  Examiners  had  refused  to  ac- 
cept diplomas  from  that  institution),  and  attacked  the  con- 
stitutionality of  the  law.  The  Circuit  Judge  sustained  the 
law,  from  which  decision  Wilkina  appealed. 

In  the  Supreme  Court,  the  opinion  of  the  full  bench  was 
pronounced  by  Justice  Byron  Iv.  Elliott,  as  follows : 

"The  indictment  upon  which  is  founded  the  judgment 
from  which  this  appeal  is  prosecuted,  charges  that  the  appel- 
lant did  practice  the  profession  of  dentistry  without  having 
obtained  a  certificate  from  the  Board  of  Examiners  estab- 
lished under  the  Act  of  March  7th,  1887. 

'*  There  is  entire  harmony  in  the  adjudged  cases  upon  the 
question  of  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  enact  laws  pre- 
scribing what  qualifications  a  person  shall  possess,  who  enters 
upon  the  practice  of  a  profession  requiring  professional  skill 
and  learning.  From  the  earliest  years  of  the  common  law, 
men  who  engaged  in  the  practice  of  the  professions  of  law  and 
medicine  were  required  to  possess  skill  and  learning,  and  to 
obtain  evidence  of  their  qualification  from  the  sources  desig- 
nated by  law.     A  long  and  unwavering  line  of  cases,  extend- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  135 

ing  from  those  early  years  of  the  law  to  the  present,  sustain 
this  doctrine.  (Eastman  v.  State,  109;  Ind.,  278,  and  cases 
cited ;  Orr  r.  Meek,  111  Ind.,  40 ;  The  State  ex  rel.  v.  Green, 
14  N.  E.  Rep.,  352.) 

"  This  firmly-settled  doctrine  is  thus  well  stated  in  a  late 
work  :  '  Where  the  successful  prosecution  of  a  calling  re- 
quires a  certain  amount  of  technical  knowledge  and  profes- 
sional skill,  and  the  lack  of  them  in  the  practitioner  will  re- 
sult in  material  damage  to  one  who  employs  him,  it  is  a  legiti- 
mate exercise  of  the  police  power  to  prohibit  any  one  from 
engaging  in  the  calling,  who  has  not  previously  been  exam- 
ined by  the  lawfully  constituted  authority,  and  received  a 
certificate  in  testimony  of  his  qualification  to  practice  the 
profession.  The  right  of  the  State  to  exercise  this  control 
over  the  skilled  trades  and  learned  professions,  with  the  sin- 
gle exception  in  respect  to  teachers  and  expounders  of  reli- 
gion, has  never  been  seriously  questioned.'  (Tredman,  on 
Limitations  of  Police  Power,  p.  200,  Section  87.)  In  even 
stronger  language,  Judge  Cooley  affirms  this  general  princi- 
ple. (Cooley,  on  Torts,  289.)  This  principle  extends  to  many 
trades  and  professions,  as  pilots,  engineers,  and  the  like. 
(Tredman,  on  Limitation  of  Police  Power,  624 ;  Cooley,  Const. 
Lim.,  743.)  The  legislative  judgment,  that  the  welfare  of  the 
public  requires  that  those  practicing  the  dental  profession 
shall  possess  the  necessary  skill  and  learning,  and  shall  obtain 
a  certificate,  is  probably  conclusive.  But,  if  it  were  not,  the 
court  must  take  judicial  knowledge  that  it  is  a  profession  re- 
quiring skill.  The  fact  that  the  dentist  employs  his  profes- 
sional skill  upon  an  important  part  of  the  human  body,  is  of 
course  known  to  every  one,  and  cannot  be  unknown  to  the 
courts.  As  this  is  known,  it  must  follow  that  it  may  also 
be  judicially  known  that  one  unskilled  in  the  profession 
may  injure  the  person  who  employs  him.  As  this  is  so,  then, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  Legislature  may  prescribe  the  qualifica- 
tions of  those  permitted  to  practice  the  profession. 

"  The  Board  of  Examiners,  established  under  the  law,  is 
the  lawfully  constituted  authority,  and  from  it  the  certificate 
required  by  law  must  be  obtained.     The  Legislature,  as  the 


136  DENTAL    JURISPR1  DBN(  I  . 

law  making  power,  has  authority  to  prescribe  the  method  <»i" 
procedure.     Its  authority  does  nol  end  with  declaring  what 
qualifications  lie  who  enters  upon  the  practice  of  that  profee 
sion  shall  possess.     As  it  has  plenary  power  over  the  whole 

subject,  it  alone  must  be  the  judge  of  what  ie  wise  and  ex- 
pedient, both  as  to  the  qualifications  required,  and  as  to  the 
method  of  ascertaining  these  qualifications.  The  courts  cannot 

exercise  any  supervisory  power  over  the  Legislature  as  long 
as  is  keeps  within  the  limits  of  the  Constitution.  (Fry  v. 
State,  63  Ind.,  532  ;  Eastman  v.  State,  supra  ;  Cooley,  Const. 
Lim.,  202-206.) 

"  It  is  an  established  law  that  an  Act  of  the  Legislature 
cannot  be  annulled  by  the  judiciary  in  any  respect, unless  it 
clearly  contravenes  some  provision  of  the  constitution.  Doubt 
must  be  resolved  in  favor  of  the  validity  of  the  statute.  Since 
the  doctrine  was  announced  by  Chief  Justice  Marshall,  early 
in  the  history  of  our  country,  it  has  been  inflexibly  adhered 
to  by  all  the  courts.  (Cooley,  Const.  Lim.,  5th  ed.,  218  ;  Beau- 
champ  v.  The  State,  6  Blackf.  299;  Pittsburg,  etc.,  Co.  v. 
Brown,  67  Ind.,  49  ;  Hedderich  v.  State,  101  Ind.,  564 ;  Rob- 
inson v.  Schenck,  102  Ind.,  307-319.) 

"  As  the  Legislature  has  exclusive  power  over  the  entire 
subject,  it  is  our  duty  to  uphold  the  statute  as  it  comes  to  us 
from  the  Legislature  with  the  executive  sanction.  We  can- 
not annul  any  part  of  the  statute,  unless  it  clearly  violates 
some  provision  of  the  Constitution.  We  have  given  full  con- 
sideration to  the  appellant's  argument,  but  wTe  are  unable  to 
perceive  that  it  even  proves  that  it  is  probable  that  some  pro- 
vision of  the  Constitution  has  been  violated  ;  much  less  does 
it  prove  that  it  has  been  violated  beyond  doubt. 

"It  is  contended  that  the  Act  is  unconstitutional,  because 
it  authorizes  the  Indiana  Dental  Association  to  appoint  three 
members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners.  The  argument  is  that 
the  Dental  Association  is  a  corporation,  and  that  the  Act,  in 
authorizing  it  to  appoint,  enlarges  its  corporate  powers,  and. 
therefore,  violates  the  Constitution  by  enlarging  the  powers 
of  a  corporation  by  a  special  Act.  In  more  particulars  than 
one,  this  argument  is  unsound.  It  rests  on  an  undue  assump- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  137 

tion.  Authorizing  a  corporation  to  select  persons  to  per- 
form a  duty  in  which  the  public  is  interested,  is,  in  no 
just  sense,  the  enlargement  of  corporative  powers.  The  desig- 
nation of  the  corporation  as  the  selecting  body  is  not  the 
grant  of  corporate  powers.  This  is  very  clear  to  our  minds. 
Clearly,  the  Legislature  might  repeal  the  Act  at  pleasure,  and 
this  of  itself  proves  that  no  corporate  right  is  granted,  for, 
if  there  was  such  a  grant,  there  could  be  no  valid  repeal.  It 
is  quite  as  clear  that  a  statute,  artificial  or  natural,  which  di- 
rects a  person  to  perform  a  particular  act,  is  not,  for  that 
reason,  transformed  from  a  general  into  a  special  statute. 
But  granting  (and  the  concession  can  only  be  made  for  the 
argument's  sake)  that  the  authority  to  appoint  members  of 
the  Board  of  Examiners  is  a  corporate  act,  still  the  concession 
would,  by  no  means,  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  the  statute 
infringes  upon  the  Constitution.  The  provision,  which  it  is 
asserted  the  Act  violates,  is  this  :  '  Corporations,  other  than 
banking,  shall  not  be  created  by  special  Act,  but  may  be 
formed  under  general  laws.'  It  cannot,  with  the  faintest  tinge 
of  justice,  be  affirmed  that  the  simple  delegation  of  authority 
to  appoint  three  men  to  perform  duties  affecting  the  public, 
is  the  creation  of  a  new  corporation.  Changes  of  infinitely 
more  importance  have  been  held  not  to  create  a  new  corpora- 
tion. (Wallace  v.  Loomis,  97  IT.  S.,  146  ;  Atty.-Gen.  v.  The 
Xorth  Am.,  etc.,  Co.,  82  N".  Y.,  172;  South  v.  Pacific  R.  R. 
Co.,  6  Sawyer,  157.) 

"  The  general  rule  is  thus  stated  by  a  late  writer:  ,l  A 
special  Act  of  the  Legislature  regulating  an  existing  corpora- 
tion, or  granting  to  it  new  privileges,  without  altering  its 
charter  or  affecting  its  charter  contract,  would  not  be  in  vio- 
lation of  the  letter,  or  of  the  spirit  of  the  Constitutional 
prohibition."  (Moranetz,  on  Corp.,  sec.  12.)  The  case  of 
the  Corporation  of  Bluffton  v.  Wiley,  111  Ind.,  declares  a 
similar  doctrine.  But  it  is  really  not  necessary  to  inquire 
how  far  a  corporate  grant  may  extend  without  violating  the 
Constitution,  for  we  are  well  satisfied  that  the  delegation  of 
the  naked  power  to  name  three  members  of  the  board  is  not 
a  grant  of  corporate  power. 


138  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

"The  objection  that  the  Act  invests  the  Board  of  Exam- 
iners with  judicial  functions,  is  fully  answered  by  the  casesof 
Elmore  v.  Overton,  104  Ind.,  548;  Eastman  v.  State,  supra,  and 

the  cases  there  cited.  If  the  appellant  were  correct  in  his  as- 
sumption, then  every  School  Examiner,  who  examines  an  ap- 
plicant for  license;  every  Clerk,  who  accepts  and  acts  upon 
affidavit;  every  Auditor,  who  accepts  an  abstract  of  title 
when  he  loans  school  funds,  and  every  officer  who  ap- 
proves a  report,  would  exercise  judicial  functions.  That 
they  do,  in  some  degree,  act  judicially,  is  true,  and  so  does 
every  officer,  from  the  Governor  to  Constable,  who  is  invested 
with  discretionary  powers  ;  for  the  Governor,  when  he  issues 
a  requisition  for  a  fugitive  from  justice,  decides  many  things, 
and  the  Constable,  when  he  executes  a  writ  or  a  warrant,  exer- 
cises a  discretion,  but  no  one  of  these  officers  exercises  judi- 
cial judgment  in  the  sense  that  a  court  or  judge  does.  These 
officers,  one  and  all,  are  ministerial  officers,  and  not  judges 
or  courts  ;  and  the  judicial  functions  meant  by  the  Constitu- 
tion are  such  only  as  courts  or  judges  exercise.  A  judicial 
duty,  within  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  is  such  a  duty 
as  legitimately  pertains  to  an  officer  in  the  department  desig- 
nated by  the  Constitution  as  the  judicial.  By  this  desig- 
nation is  meant  the  judiciary  in  the  true  sense  of  the  term. 
"  This  case  falls  within  the  class  of  cases  represented  by 
Maynes  v.  Moore,  16  Ind.,  116  ;  Flournoy  v.  City,  17  Ind., 
169;  Pennington  v.  Streight,  54  Ind.,  316  ;  State  v.  Johnson, 
105  Ind.,  463-467  ;  Weaver  v.  Templen,  14  N.  E.  Rep.,  600; 
Betts  v.  Dixon,  3  Conn.,  107;  Crane  v.  Camp,  12  Conn.,  463. 
In  Flournoy  v.  City,  supra,  the  court  said  :  t;  An  act  is  none 
the  less  ministerial  because  the  person  performing  under 
it  may  have  to  satisfy  himself  that  a  state  of  facts  exists, 
under  which  it  is  his  right  and  duty  to  perform  the  act."  It 
is  a  mistake,  therefore,  to  assume  that  the  statute  must  con- 
form to  all  the  requirements  as  to  notice  and  like  incidents, 
that  would  be  necessary  if  the  Act  were  judicial.  We  cannot, 
therefore,  hold  the  Act  unconstitutional,  because  it  does  not 
make  such  provisions  as  would  be  necessary  if  the  examiners 
constituted  a  judicial  tribunal.     We  suppose  a  successful  de- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  139 

fense  might  be  made  by  a  person  who  had,  in  good  faith, 
sought  an  opportunity  to  obtain  a  license,  and  failed,  through 
the  fault  of  the  examiners,  to  meet  at  the  time  appointed  ; 
but  one  who  has  had  notice,  and  failed  to  avail  himself  of 
the  opportunity,  as  was  the  case  here,  cannot  successfully 
defend.  The  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  board  are  to 
be  fixed  by  the  persons  whom  the  law  has  vested  with  author- 
ity, and  one  who  desires  a  license,  must  at  least  make  reas- 
onable inquiry ;  for  a  public  law  gives  him  notice,  nor  is  an  ap- 
plicant delayed  until  the  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Examiners, 
for  Section  7  of  the  Act  expressly  provides  that, '  any  member 
of  the  board  may  grant  a  permit  to  any  person  who  shall  file 
with  the  member  his  application  therefor.'  There  is,  there- 
fore, no  denial  of  an  opportunity  to  acquire  a  permit,  or 
any  delay  required,  for  a  permit  may  be  had  at  any  time 
upon  application.  The  way,  therefore,  is  always  open,  and 
no  one  need  to  be  in  doubt  what  course  to  pursue.  One  who 
has  a  way  always  open  to  him,  by  which  he  can  attain  what 
is  required  to  protect  him,  has  himself  to  censure,  if  he  does 
not  use  diligence  to  avail  himself  of  the  opportunity  afforded 
him.  If  the  permit  is  obtained  under  Section  7,  then  notice 
is  necessarily  imparted ;  but  where  the  party  must  himself 
take  the  initiatory  step,  he  cannot  insist  that  notice  be  given 
him  before  prosecution. 

"If  it  were  conceded  that  counsel  were  rio-ht  in  asserting; 
that  Section  11,  which  provides  the  method  in  which  com- 
pensation of  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be 
fixed,  is  unconstitutional,  it  would  not  avail  the  appellant, 
for,  if  all  that  part  of  the  statute  were  annulled,  there  would 
still  be  a  complete  law  fully  prescribing  rules  and  adequately 
defining  the  offense  charged.  It  is  perfectly  well  settled  that 
a  part  of  a  statute  may  be  declared  invalid,  and  if  enough 
remains  to  constitute  a  complete  statute,  that  which  remains 
may  be  enforced.  If,  therefore,  all  that  part  of  the  statute 
which  relates  to  the  compensation  of  members  of  the  Board 
of  Examiners  should  be  rejected,  the  appellant  would  derive 
no  benefit,  for  the  valid  part  of  the  statute  fully  prescribes 
the  duties  of  those  who  assume  to  practice  dentistry,  and 


140  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

fully  defines  and  creates  the  offense  described   in  the  indict- 
ment. 

lw  Arguments  that  might  perhaps  not  be  without  weight 
if  addressed  to  the  Legislature,  are  adduced  by  counsel,  but, 
as  these  arguments  all  bear  upon  questions  of  pure  legislative 
policy,  they  can  have  no  weight  with  the  courts.  All  that 
the  courts  can  do,  even  though  they  may  be  impressed  with  the 
need  of  amendments,  is  to  test  the  statute  by  the  Constitution, 
and,  if  it  sustains  that  test,  they  must  uphold  it  as  it  is 
written. 

"  It  is  urged  that  the  state  did  not  prove  that  the  Indiana 
Dental  Association  wras  duly  incorporated,  and  that  for  this 
reason  there  should  have  been  an  acquittal.  This  position  ie 
untenable.  It  is  so,  because  it  is  immaterial  whether  the 
association  was  incorporated  or  was  not,  for  the  Legislature 
might  have  authorized  an  unincorporated  association,  as  well 
as  an  incorporated  one,  to  select  three  members  of  the  Board 
of  Examiners.  It  is  so,  because  granting  that  only  a  corpo- 
ration could  be  authorized  to  appoint,  the  corporate  existence 
cannot  be  questioned  in  a  collateral  proceeding.  It  is  so,  be- 
cause the  Legislature  has  recognized  the  existence  of  the  asso- 
ciation, and  this  creates  the  presumption,  if  indeed  it  does 
not  do  much  more,  that  it  had  a  legal  existence. 

Finding  no  error  in  the  record,  we  affirm  the  judgment." 

THE  STATE  OF  INDIANA,  ) 
Supreme  Court.  / 

I,  William  T.  Noble,  Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  State  of  Indiana,  certify  the  above  and  foregoing  to  be  a 
true  and  complete  copy  of  the  opinion  of  said  court  in  the 
above  entitled  cause. 

In  witness  thereof,  I  hereto  set  my  hand  and  affix  the 
seal  of  said  court,  at  the  city  of  Indianapolis  this  seventh 
day  of  March,  1888. 

AVm.  T.  Noble,  C.  S.  C. 

[seal]  — Dental  Cosmos. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  141 

Again,  the  Supreme  Court  of  Kansas  has  given  a  deci- 
sion sustaining  the  validity  of  the  dental  law  of  that  state. 
Dr.  E.  H.  Creditor  was  practicing  dentistry  in  another  state, 
and  came  to  Kansas  after  the  dental  law  went  into  operation. 
He  was  promptly  informed  by  the  State  Board  that  he  was 
ineligible  to  practice,  not  having  a  diploma.  He  denied  the 
validity. of  the  law,  and  continued  practice.  The  matter  was 
brought  before  the  lower  court,  which  decided  that  the  law 
was  valid  and  in  force.  Dr.  Creditor  appealed,  and  the  Su- 
preme Court  unanimously  affirmed  the  validity  of  the  Kan- 
sas law. 

These  three  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  would  seem 
to  uphold  the  constitutionality  of  these  statutes ;  but  on  the 
other  hand,  the  reverse  decision  has  been  rendered  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  New  Hampshire,  on  July  26th,  1889,  viz.: 
In  the  cases  of  a  physician  and  dentist  indicted  for  practicing 
medicine  and  dentistry  without  a  license,  the  Supreme  Court 
of  New  Hampshire  quashed  the  indictments  and  declared  the 
law  requiring  a  license  for  the  practice  of  medicine  and  den- 
tistry unconstitutional. 

There  is  no  question  but  that  this  decision,  contrary  to 
the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Courts  of  other  states,  is  un- 
just and  illegal,  and  inconsistent  with  the  objects  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States.  If  the  cases  are  appealed  to 
the  United  States  Supreme  or  Circuit  Courts,  I  firmly  believe 
the  decision  will  be  reversed. 

In  the  various  states,  if  not  generally,  the  practice  of 
dentistry  is  prohibited  without  a  diploma,  or  a  license  from 
the  "  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners." 

Penalties  are  usually  imposed  by  the  statutes  for  a  vio- 
lation of  the  enactments  regulating  the  practice  of  dentistry, 
and  the  statutes  provide  that  the  offender,  for  their  violation, 
may  be  fined,  imprisoned,  or  both. 

In  Pennsylvania,  any  one  convicted  of  illegally  practicing 
dentistry  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  is  punishable  by  a 
fine  of  not  less  than  fifty,  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars. 
In  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  the  penalty  for  unlawfully  prac- 
ticing dentistry  is  three  hundred  dollars,  upon  conviction. 


142  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

In  New  York,  the  penalty  is  a  tine  of  from  fifty  to  two  hun- 
dred dollars.  The  Colorado  law  imposes  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  one  hundred,  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  or  im- 
prisonment of  from  one  to  ninety  days. 

Where  the  defendant  was  charged  with  practicing  with- 
out, a  diploma,  the  production  of  a  diploma  by  the  defendant 
would  be  a  prim"  facu  evidence  of  his  right  to  it.  (Raynor 
v.  State,  62  Wis.,  289  ;  Wendel  v.  State,  62  Wis.,  300  ;  Holmes 
v.  Ilalde,  74  Me.,  28.) 

Formerly,  in  some  of  the  states,  notably  New  Jersey 
and  Pennsylvania,  it  was  almost  impossible  to  convict  a  per- 
son for  the  illegal  practice  of  dentistry,  on  account  of  the  jury 
system  in  vogue,  the  jury  usually  being  composed  of  men  who 
lacked  the  brains  to  comprehend  the  case,  and  judgment 
necessary  to  give  a  just  decision.  Clear  and  conclusive  evi- 
dence has  in  a  number  of  cases  been  produced  by  the 
prosecutor,  proving  that  the  defendant  violated  the  law,  and 
the  judge  has  charged  the  jury  strongly  against  the  offenders, 
still  the  juries  have  acquitted  the  men  simply  through  a  feel- 
ing of  sympathy. 

The  case  of  Johannas  Van  Elderen  v.  State,  in  New  Jer- 
sey, in  1883,  furnishes  a  notable  example  of  these  unjust  de- 
cisions.    Another  case  in  Nebraska  is,  as  follows : 

In  July  last,  Geo.  W.  Schwartz  was  indicted  for  prac- 
ticing dentistry  in  Nebraska  City,  Nebraska,  in  violation  of 
the  State  law.  The  committee  of  the  State  Dental  Society 
did  not  commence  the  case,  but,  finding  it  had  been  com- 
menced, took  charge  of  the  prosecution.  The  case  came  to 
trial  September  28th,  the  defense  being  that  Schwartz  was  a 
graduate  of  medicine,  and  qualified  by  his  diploma  to  prac- 
tice dentistry.  The  court,  however,  held,  "that  a  physician's 
diploma  did  not  authorize  him  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery. "  The  defense  further  offered  to  prove  that  the  defend- 
ant was  a  skilled  workman  in  dentistry,  that  he  operated 
in  a  manner  that  gave  satisfaction  to  his  patients,  and  that 
he  did  good  work  as  a  dentist.  All  of  which  was  ruled  out 
by  the  court. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  rulings  of  the  court  ex- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  143 

eluded  every  particle  of  defense  offered  by  the  defendant,  and 
that  the  instructions  of  the  court  were  against  the  defendant, 
the  jury,  after  being  out  eighteen  hours,  returned  a  verdict  of 
not  guilty.  What  the  court  thought  of  the  verdict  is  shown 
by  the  unmerciful  scoring  Judge  Field  gave  the  jury  in  dis- 
charging them  at  the  close  of  term.  Among  other  things, 
he  said :  "Gentlemen,  I  cannot  refrain  from  saying  something 
at  this  time.  There  have  been  four  criminal  cases  of  import- 
ance before  this  court  durins;  the  term.  The  first  was  that 
of  the  dentist  Schwartz,  who  admitted  a  violation  of  the  law ; 
yet  the  jury  acquitted  him,"  etc. 

The  majority  of  the  statutes  have  been  amended  and 
made  more  stringent,  hence  they  are  less  frequently  violated 
than  formerly,  and  a  conviction  can  be  more  easily  obtained. 


144  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

§  42.     PATENT  RIGHTS. 

A. — THE   .JURISPRUDENCE  OF  DENTAL  PATENTS. 

The  subject  of  the  jurisprudence  of  patents  of  the  heal- 
ing arts,  is  peculiar  and  applicable  alone  to  dentistry,  which 
is  the  only  profession  that  from  necessity  must  harbor  and 
submit  to  a  system  of  "  patent-methods." 

Jurisprudence,  in  reference  to  dental  patents,  compre- 
hends the  interpretation  of  the  principles  and  practices  of 
the  law  as  applied  to  such  classes  of  patents  ;  hence  its  limita- 
tions, on  the  one  hand,  are  the  legal  rights  and  privileges 
granted  the  inventors  in  the  "  claims  "  allowed  in  the  patents 
issued  to  them  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  requirements  of 
the  law  respecting  the  observance  of  their  legal  protection 
and  non-infringement. 

In  the  consideration  of  this  subject,  only  such  patents 
that  have  been  granted  for  dental  operations,  methods  and 
processes  of  operating,  will  be  reviewed ;  and  patents  on  dental 
instruments,  appliances,  apparatus,  etc.,  must  necessarily  be 
ignored  as  not  properly  belonging  to  the  subject. 

It  is  not  the  intention  of  the  author  to  enter  into  a  tirade 
against  these  patented  dental  operation  methods,  illiberal 
patent  methods,  and  of  the  abuses  that  have  manifestly 
resulted  in  the  legal  inability  of  the  dental  practitioner  to 
perform  certain  operations,  but  to  give  a  distinct  legal  inter- 
pretation of  these  patents  and  define  other  legal  points 
pertaining  thereto.* 

*  It  is  the  intention  of  the  "  Central  Dental  Association  of  Northern 
New  Jersey,"  with  the  co-operation  of  many  of  the  leading  dental  societies 
throughout  the  United  States,  to  petition  Congress  to  pass  an  enactment  pro- 
hibiting, in  future,  the  granting  or  issue  of  letters  patent  for  any  invention  or 
discovery,  or  any  improvement  thereof,  or  any  method  or  process  in  operative 
dentistry,  and  providing  some  expeditious  method  by  which  such  patent  here- 
after inadvertently  granted,  may,  by  the  decree  of  some  competent  court,  be 
annulled  and  cancelled.     The  Act  annexed  hereto  is  the  proposed  enactment  : 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  145 

B. — LBGAL    DEFINITION   AND    CLASSIFICATION    OF    DENTAL 
OPERATIONS. 

Legally,  an  operation  in  dentistry  would  be  considered 
as  the  performance  of  some  manual  act,  in  a  methodical  man- 
ner, upon  the  human  teeth,  surrounding  tissues  and  bones, 
usually  with  instruments,  with  the  view  of  restoring  them  to 
a  sound  or  healthy  condition  ;  and  the  adaptation  of  substi- 
tutes for  them,  when,  by  age,  accident,  or  disease,  they  are  lost. 

For  convenience  and  practical  reasons,  operations  in 
dentistry  can  be  divided  and  classified  into:  first,  surgical 
dental;  second,  surgical-mechanical  dental  ;  third, mechani- 
cal dental. 

A  surgical  dental  operation  would  be  interpreted  as  a 
cutting  or  some  similar  operation  performed  upon  the  teeth, 


AN   ACT  TO   PROHIBIT   THE  GRANTING   AND   ISSUE   OF    LETTERS    PATENT,   IN 

CERTAIN   CASES. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States 
of  America,  in  Congress  assembled,  1.  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  letters  patent  shall  not  be  granted  or  issued  to,  nor  obtained  by  any  per- 
son, for  any  invention  or  discovery,  or  improvement  thereof,  of  any  method  or 
process  of  repairing  or  restoring  the  human  teeth,  or  the  functions  thereof, 
filling  cavities  therein,  destroying  the  pulp  or  nerves  thereof,  reducing  inflam- 
mation in  the  human  mouth  or  teeth,  giving  to  any  person  under  treatment, 
or  applying  locally  to  any  part  to  be  treated  or  operated  upon,  any  drug,  gas 
or  substance,  in  aid  of  any  surgical  or  dental  operation,  or  for  the  purpose  of 
alleviating  the  suffering  caused  by  such  operation  or  treatment,  inserting  in 
the  mouth,  or  applying  or  fixing  to  the  teeth,  any  dentures  or  other  artificial 
appliances  intended  to  replace,  renew,  or  restore  lost,  decayed,  and  defective 
teeth,  or  of  any  method  or  process  of  surgical  or  dental  treatment  of  or  opera- 
tion upon  the  human  mouth  or  teeth,  for  any  disease,  decay  or  defect  what- 
soever, or  of  any  new  or  improved  method  or  process  whatsoever,  in  operative 
dentistry,  and  every  such  letters  patent  hereafter  granted,  or  issued  to  or 
obtained  by  any  person,  shall  be  absolutely  void  and  of  no  effect. 

2.  That  the  Circuit  Courts  of  the  United  States  are  hereby  given  juris- 
diction and  power  to  decree  the  annulment  and  cancellation  of  any  letters 
patent  granted,  issued  or  obtained  in  violation  of  this  Act,  upon  suit  brought 
in  equity  by  any  person  against  the  owner  or  owners  thereof.  Such  suit  may 
be  instituted  in  any  district  in  which  the  owner,  or  one  or  more  of  the  owners 
reside,  and  in  case  any  one  of  several  owners  be  served  with  process,  decree 
of  annulment  and  cancellation  may  be  made  against  all  of  the  owners,  in  the 
same  manner  as  if  they  had  all  been  served  with  process. 

■>.  This  Ad  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


140  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENT  I  . 

their  roots,  or  the  bones  and  tissues  surrounding  them,  with 
the  view  of  restoring  them  to  a  sound  or  healthy  condition.    The 

extraction  of  the  teeth,  the  burring  or  cutting  of  diseased 
portions  of  a  tooth,  the  removal  of  the  pulp,  the  cutting  or 
shaping  of  the  end  of  a  tooth- root,  previous  to  adapting  an 
artificial  crown  to  it — can  all  be  classified  as  surgical  dental 
operations. 

A  surgical-mechanical  dental  operation  is  distinctly  an 
operation  dependent  upon  a  surgical  dental  operation,  in  com- 
bination with  mechanical  means  or  devices  to  restore  artifici- 
ally the  lost  parts  operated  upon,  and  thus  renew  their  natural 
functions.  In  this  classification,  such  operations  as  the  filling 
of  the  teeth  by  all  methods  and  materials,  the  filling  of  their 
roots,  insertion  of  crowns,  crown-bridges,  artificial  dentures, 
cleft-palate  operations,  and  the  regulation  of  the  teeth,  can 
be  included. 

A  mechanical  dental  operation  is  construed  to  mean, 
the  construction  and  process  erf  constructing  out  of  the  mouth  the 
mechanical  rrnans  and  derives  necessary  and  intended  to  restore 
the  lost  natural  function  of  the  part  operated  upon.  In  this 
class,  we  have  such  operations  as  the  methods  and  processes 
of  making  crowns, bridge  operations, artificial  dentures,  etc.; 
substantially  they  are  process-patents. 

c — patents  granted  for  dental  operations. 

In  the  first  class,  surgical  dental  operations,  several  pat- 
ents have  been  granted,  as  follows  : 

A  patent,  No.  277,935,  was  issued  May  22nd,  1883,  to 
Cassius  M.  Richmond,  of  New  York,  N.  Y.,  in  which  the 
following  claim  was  allowed  : 

The  process  of  treating  teeth  to  remove  the  nerves,  the 
same  consisting  in  isolating  the  tooth  to  be  treated  (presum- 
ably by  a  rubber  dam),  and  then  subjecting  the  latter  to  the 
action  of  a  jet  of  volatile  liquid  until  the  nerve  in  the 
same  is  benumbed. 

Again,  a  patent,  No.  277,943,  was  granted  onthe  same  date 
to  Cassius  M.  Richmond  : 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  147 

First.  For  the  process  of  preparing  roots  for  the  recep- 
tion of  artificial  dentures,  which  consists  in  grooving,  with 
opposite  grooves,  on  the  lingual  and  palatine  surfaces,  and  re- 
moving (snapping  off)  the  crown  by  a  suitable  forceps. 

Second.  For  the  process  of  preparing  a  root  for  the  recep- 
tion of  an  artificial  tooth-denture,  which  consists  in  removing 
the  crown  from  the  root  by  a  suitable  contrivance,  and  then  im- 
mediately expelling  the  nerve  from  its  cavity,  by  driving  a 
suitably  shaped  piece  of  wood  into  the  nerve  cavity. 

Third.  For  the  process  of  treating  and  preparing  the  roots 
of  teeth,  the  same  consisting  in  expelling  the  nerve  from  its 
cavity,  and  then  instantly  filling  the  nerve  cavity  with  a 
wooden  peg. 

Fourth.  For  the  process  of  preparing  a  root  for  the  recep- 
tion of  an  artificial  denture,  which  consists  in  removing  the 
crown,  and  then  driving  into  the  nerve  cavity  a  suitably  shaped 
piece  of  wood,  in  removing  the  same,  and  cleansing  the  nerve 
cavity,  and  in  immediately  plugging  or  filling  the  upper  part 
of  fhe  nerve  cavity,  by  driving  in  another  piece  of  wood. 

This  patent,  No.  277,943,  was  declared  invalid  in  the 
case  of  International  Tooth-Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond  et  al  (30 
Fed.  Rep.,  785,  United  States  Circuit  Court,  Southern  Dis- 
trict New  York.)  On  an  appeal, the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  sustained  the  action  of  the  Circuit  Court  declaring 
this  patent  invalid. 

A  patent  was  issued  to  E.  A.  Bigelow,  Brandon,  Vt,, 
March  8th,  1827,  for  a  method  of  engrafting  teeth.  (Patent 
expired.) 

A  patent  was  granted  to  Thomas  Bruff,  Maryland,  July 
1st,  1797,  for  extracting  teeth.     (Patent  expired.) 

A  patent  was  granted  to  H.  H.  Hayden,  Baltimore,  Md., 
October  4th,  1817,  for  means  of  preventing  decay  of  teeth. 
(Patent  expired.) 

Patent,  No.  22,851,  was  issued  to  W.  G.  A.  Bonwill,  Feb- 
ruary 8th,  1859.  The  claim  was  for  the  application  of  elec- 
tricity to  dental  purposes,  the  described  method  consisting  of 
extracting  or  extirpating  the  dental  pulp  or  internal  nerve  of 
teeth,  to  wit:    by  the  application  of  a  current  of  electricity, 


148  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

through  the  instruments  made  use  of  in  the  performance  of 
said  operation,  and  constantly  to  the  dental  pulp  or  internal 
nerve,  during  the  operation  of  cutting  out  or  extracting  the 
same.     (Patent  expired.) 

Methods  <>f  Filling  and  Restoring  Decayed  Teeth. 

In  the  second  class — surgical  mechanical  operations — the 
following  patents  were  issued  : 

Patent,  Wo.  404,745, granted  to  Elbert  C.  Taylor,  June  4th, 
1889,  for  a  method  of  filling  teeth,  which  consists  in  cleaning 
the  cavit}*,  electro-plating  the  walls  thereof,  then  inserting  a 
plug  in  the  cavity,  and  subsequently  filling  up  the  space  be- 
tween the  walls  of  the  cavity  and  the  plug,  and  the  re- 
mainder of  the  cavity,  by  electro-deposition. 

Remark : — The  methods  described  in  this  patent  right 
are  entirely  novel,  and  hence  its  validity  is  unquestionable. 

Patent,  No.  386,692,  granted  to  Win,  A.  Dartt,  January 
24th,  1888,  for  a  process  of  filling  decayed  teeth,  which  con- 
sists in  first  filling  the  cavity  of  decay  with  soft  material,  as 
wax,  and  restoring  the  original  form  of  a  tooth  out  of  the 
same  material ;  next,  taking  an  impression  of  this  restored 
tooth  with  plaster-of-Paris,  and  casting  a  zinc  die  therefrom 
in  shape  like  said  tooth;  then,  placing  a  piece  of  gold  or 
other  swagable  metal  plate  on  the  zinc  die,  at  a  point  corres- 
ponding to  the  location  of  the  cavity  in  the  natural  tooth ; 
then,  placing  a  piece  of  soft  metal,  such  as  sheet  lead,  over 
the  last  named  metallic  plate,  and,  pounding  it  down  into 
the  die,  removing  this  plate,  which  is  shaped  like  the  tooth  at 
that  point,  the  inner  side  is  coated  with  wax,  and  the  plate  is 
pressed  against  the  natural  tooth  at  the  corresponding  point, 
removing  the  surplus  wax  and  metal,  and  affixing  pins  in 
the  inside  of  said  plate ;  next,  cleaning  the  cavity  in  the  nat- 
ural tooth  of  the  first  named  soft  material,  and  filling  it  with 
a  suitable  plastic  material,  like  cement  or  gutta-percha,  and 
pressing  the  pins  secured  to  the  plate  into  said  plastic  materi- 
al, while  the  latter  is  still  soft,  and  keeping  the  plate  in  po- 
sition till  said  material  hardens  around  the  pins. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  149 

Remark : — This  is  substantially  a  process-patent,  in 
which  each  element  or  step  in  the  operation  is  necessary  to 
sustain  its  validity.  The  result  attained  is  practically  the 
same  as  described  in  patent,  No.  179,945.  In  the  latter  pat- 
ent, the  claim  is  for  the  result,  whereas  in  the  patent  under 
discussion,  the  claim  allows  for  the  method  of  obtaining  the 
result. 

Patent,  No.  402,252,  granted  to  Albert  Robinson,  April 
30th,  1889,  for  a  process  of  filling  teeth,  by  first  making  a 
mould  by  swaging  metal  foil  into  the  cavity  ;  filling  said 
mould  with  molten  gold  or  other  metal ;  grooving  the  bottom 
of  the  filling  thus  prepared,  and  fastening  said  filling  into 
said  cavity  by  means  of  cement  inserted  in  said  grooves. 

Remark : — This  patent  is  novel  to  the  extent  of  the  sub- 
stitution of  gold  or  some  other  metal  for  a  plastic  substance 
in  filling  the  matrix  or  mould  to  form  the  tooth-plug.  In 
patent,  No.  375,167,  the  claim  granted  is  similar,  aside  from  the 
above  noted  substitution  of  materials,  which  would  invali- 
date the  patent,  but  the  dissimilar  methods  employed  in 
securing  the  plug  in  the  cavity  sustain  each  patent. 

For  methods  of  restoring  lost  portions  of  a  natural  tooth- 
crown,  several  patents  have  been  issued,  as  follows : 

A  patent,  No.  403,597,  issued  to  Charles  II.  Land,  May 
21st,  1889,  for  a  process  of  restoring  a  lost  portion  of  a  tooth,  by 
forming  a  crown  or  partial  crown  to  conform  to  the  lost  por- 
tion of  the  tooth.  The  claims  granted  allow,  first,  to  secure 
an  anchoring  post  in  the  crown  (natural);  then,  fitting  a  thin 
plate  (platinum)  on  this  post  and  burnishing  it  to  the  adja- 
cent tooth-parts  to  form  a  mould — the  exact  shape  of  the  lost 
portion  of  the  tooth. 

A  tube  is  fitted  over  the  anchoring  post  and  fastened  to 
the  metal  mould.  A  porcelain  facing  with  pins  is  then  ad- 
justed to  form  the  portion  of  the  tooth  restored.  Plastic  por- 
celain paste  is  moulded  as  an  intermediate  body  between  the 
facing  and  the  metal  mould,  and  the  said  body  is  fused  with 
the  matrix  or  base  and  the  facing,  making  one  whole  piece, 
with  the  tube  in  the  centre.  This  piece  is  slipped  over  the 
anchoring  post  of  the  tube  in  the  body  engaging  it,  and  it 


150  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

can  be  secured  permanently  on  the  post  by  means  of  a  cement. 
(The  tube  is  not  a  necessity  according  to  the  second  claim  of 
this  patent.) 

Remark: — This  is  a  "  combination  "  patent,  in  which 
each  element  of  the  claim  is  necessary  to  sustain  the  validity 
of  the  patent,  which  can  be  avoided  by  taking  away  one  ele- 
ment and  substituting  another.  Thus,  if  the  anchoring  post 
and  tube  are  omitted,  and,  instead,  using  a  band  to  encircle 
the  tooth  soldered  to  the  metal  mould,  the  patent  is  overcome. 
Again,  if  the  tube  is  split  and  tapered,  and  anchored  in  the 
natural  tooth,  while  the  post  is  baked  in  the  porcelain  por- 
tion, the  method  is  reversed,  and  more  security  is  obtained 
by  means  of  the  split  tube  chucking  the  post  when  inserted 
in  position. 

Patent, No.  405,167,  to  Charles  H.  Land,  Detroit,  Michi- 
gan, granted  June  11th,  1889.  This  patent  allows  a  process 
for  restoring  decayed  teeth,  by  imbedding  an  anchoring  nut 
in  the  tilling  material  (either  amalgam,  gold,  cement,  etc.) 
with  the  tooth-cavity,  and  fastening  thereon  a  tooth-crown, 
or  portion  of  a  crown,  by  means  of  a  screw  uniting  the  tooth- 
crown,  or  section,  with  the  nut.  The  patent  also  allows  a 
fluid-tight  protecting  coat,  gutta-percha  or  cement  over  the 
tilling  material,  before  screwing  on  the  tooth-section,  thus 
making  a  fluid-tight  joint. 

Remark : — This  patent  seems  valid  as  it  does  not  inter- 
fere with  any  previously  known  methods,  nor  infringe  exist- 
ing patents.  However,  the  second  claim,  respecting  the  fluid- 
tight  covering  of  gutta-percha  to  be  placed  over  the  tilling 
material,  probably  infringes  the  Sheffield  patent,  dated  No- 
vember 16th,  1886,  and  methods  previously  used. 

Patent,  No.  432,737,  to  Charles  H.  Land,  July  22nd,  1890, 
for  a  process  of  restoring  defective  teeth  by  means  of  an  artificial 
tooth-section,  which  has  a  porous  or  biscuited  surface,  having 
a  metallic  surface  applied,  in  solution,  upon  the  said  surface 
and  fused  thereto  ;  this  metallic  surface  constituting  a  means 
of  attaching  the  said  section  to  the  base  or  natural  tooth  by 
means  of  amalgam,  which  unites  with  the  metallic  biscuited 
surface. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  151 

The  patent  also  grants  the  right  of  securing  an  impres- 
sion of  the  surface  of  the  tooth-portion,  to  be  restored  by 
means  of  a  thin  sheet  of  metal  fitted  upon  the  surface  to  form 
a  matrix  or  mould  ;  secondly,  causing  the  tooth-section  to 
conform  to  said  mould  and  hardening  said  section  ;  and 
thirdly,  uniting  said  section  to  the  tooth  by  means  of  amalgam. 

Remark: — The  methods  granted  in  this  patent  right 
■were  presumably  novel  at  the  time  the  patent  was  granted ; 
hence  the  patent  is  valid,  and  no  doubt  would  be  sustained 
as  such  in  court  decisions  if  its  validity  were  questioned. 

Patent,  No.  400,921,  granted  to  Charles  H.  Land,  April 
9th,  1890,  for  a  means  of  adjusting  a  partial  or  whole  crown. 

The  whole  combinations  or  claims  of  this  patent  grant 
the  right  for  a  porcelain  section  or  tooth  to  be  attached  to 
a  natural  tooth,  or  the  root  of  the  tooth,  by  means  of  a  threaded 
or  non-threaded  pin  with  a  porcelain  head  ;  also,  an  inter- 
vening protecting  substance  between  the  tooth-section  and 
the  natural  tooth  may  consist  of  thin  metal  burnished  to 
conform  to  the  natural  tooth,  or  cement,  or  other  intervening- 
substances. 

Remark  : — This  patent  is  valid,  as  no  interferences  can 
be  presented. 

Patent,  Xo.  454,566,  granted  to  Charles  II.  Land,  June 
23d,  1891. 

Claims : — First.  The  process  of  making  a  mould  by  swag- 
ing metal  foil  into  a  cavity,  and  then  filling  said  mould  with 
molten  gold  or  other  metal. 

Second.  For  fastening  said  metal  section  in  place  in  the 
tooth  by  means  of  amalgam. 

Third.  For  the  process  of  restoring  a  decayed  tooth  by 
ti  ret  building  up  a  foundation  upon  the  surface  of  the  lost  por- 
tion  of  the  tooth  by  means  of  amalgam,  then  burnishing  upon 
said  foundation  thin  metal  to  form  a  matrix,  then  fashioning 
a  section  by  means  of  said  matrix  and  fastening  said  section 
to  the  tooth. 

Remark: — The  first  and  second  claims  granted  in  the 
above  patent  right  are  similar  to  the  claim  issued  to  Albert 
Robinson,  patent,  No.  402,252,  and  if  this  latter  patent  is 


152  DENTAL    JURISPKUDENCB. 

valid,  the  first  claim,  above  referred  to  in  the  Land  patent, 
must  be  declared  void.     The  third  claim   is  a  combination 

which  produces  essentially  a  different  result,  and  hence  is 
valid. 

Patent,  Xo.  375,167, granted  to  Charles  H.  Land,  Decem- 
ber 20th.  1  —  7. 

First.  For  a  process  of  restoring  decayed  teeth,  consisting 
of  partially  filling  the  cavity  to  cover  an  exposed  pulp  as  a 
protection,  and  of  securing  the  impression  of  a  cavity  in  a 
decayed  tooth  by  mean-  of  a  thin  plate  of  metal  to  form  a 
matrix. 

Second.  To  provide  said  matrix  with  engaging  pin-. 
hooks  or  countersinks. 

Third.  To  mould  into  said  matrix  a  plastic  substance, 
to  form  a  section  or  plug. 

Fourth.     Engaging  said  section  or  plug  upon  a  matrix. 

Fifth.  Securing  said  matrix,  with  its  adherent  section  or 
plug,  into  the  cavity  of  the  natural  tooth,  etc. 

Remark  : — There  is  no  evidence  of  interference  with 
previous  patents,  that  will  invalidate  the  above  patent  right. 

Devices  for  Retaining  Fillings  in  Teeth,  and  Metal  Cap  Cover- 
ings for  Fillings. 

Patent,  No.  143.418,  to  Edmund  Osmond,  October  7th, 
1873.  A  small  gold  screw,  which  is  inserted  in  the  bottom  of 
a  prepared  cavity  in  a  tooth,  is  provided  with  split  upper 
ends,  which,  when  the  filling  has  been  packed  around,  are 
turned  down  over  it.  to  receive  and  secure  the  filling  more 
firmly. 

Patent,  No.  179,946,  granted  to  R.  Noble,  July  18th, 
1876.  A  metal  cap  having  pins  is  forced  into  the  filling, 
while  soft,  as  a  covering. 

Patent,  ZSo.  135.710,  issued  to  IT.  Weston,  December 
26th,  1876.  The  cap  is  struck-up  sheet  metal,  and  a  small 
rectangular  piece  is  cut  from  its  centre  and  turned  up  to  form 
a  handle,  leaving  an  opening  in  the  cap,  which  i-  closed  after 
the  cap  is  placed  in  position. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENT  £.  153 

Remark  : — The  validity  of  the  above  patents  would  be 
sustained  if  tested  in  court,  as  no  interferences  could  be 
shown. 

Method  <>f  Fastening  Tooth-Crowns  in  the  Prepared  Roots. 

Patent,  No.  238,748,  November  16th,  1886,  issued  to 
Lucius  T.  Sheffield.  The  claim  is  for  the  combination  of  the 
prepared  roots  and  an  artificial  denture  adapted  thereto ;  a 
crystallizing  cement  is  applied  in  the  root-canal  to  secure  the 
denture  ;  a  water-proof  cement,  consisting  of  a  solution  of 
gutta-percha,  is  interposed  between  the  denture  and  the 
crystallized  cement.  This  is  substantially  a  method  for 
setting  a  crown,  whereby  a  film  of  gutta-percha  is  inter- 
posed between  the  crown  and  the  cement  in  the  tooth-root. 

Remark : — This  method  is  merely  a  deviation  from  the 
usual  modes  employed  in  similar  operations. 

Permanent  Bridge-Dentures. 

Patent,  Xo.  352,784,  to  Lucius  T.  Sheffield,  granted  No- 
vember 16th,  1886. 

Abstract  of  Claims  : — In  the  manufacture  of  artificial 
denture,  preparing  the  roots  and  applying  the  supporting 
teeth  in  position  thereon ;  applying  metallic  crowns  to  the 
supporting  natural  teeth;  then,  taking  an  impression  of  the 
mouth,  and  removing  the  crowns  and  supporting  teeth  there- 
with; then,  connecting  the  opposite  sides  of  the  structure 
by  a  supplemental  brace,  connecting  the  crowns  and  support- 
ing teeth  by  the  usual  method ;  and  then,  securing  the  inter- 
mediate artificial  teeth  between  the  supporting  teeth  and 
crowns,  and  removing  the  exposed  portions  of  the  brace, 
substantially  as  described. 

Remark : — The  method  of  using  a  supplemental  brace, 
connecting  the  opposite  sides  of  the  bridge-denture,  is  the 
element  or' novelty  in  its  construction. 

Patent,  Xo.  238,940,  granted  to  James  E.  Low.  March 
15th,  1881. 


]">4  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

Brief: — The  artificial  tooth  is  held  by  bands  rigidly  and 
permanently  securing  it  to  natural  teeth  upon  either  side. 
The  artificial  tooth  requires  no  dental  plate,  and  does  not,  as 
usual,  rest  and  press  upon  the  gum  beneath. 

Claims : — First.  The  herein  described  method  of  insert- 
ing and  supporting  artificial  teeth,  which  consists  in  attaching 
said  artificial  teeth  to  continuous  bands  fitted  and  cemented  to 
the  adjoining  permanent  teeth,  whereby  said  artificial  teeth 
are  supported  by  said  permanent  teeth,  without  dependen- 
cies upon  the  gum  below. 

Second.  An  artificial  tootli  cut  away  at  the  back,  so  as 
not  to  present  any  contact  with  the  gum,  except  along  its  front 
lower  edge,  and  supported  by  rigid  attachments  to  one  or 
more  adjoining  permanent  teeth,  substantially  as  and  for 
the  purpose  set  forth. 

Remark : — The  validity  of  this  patent  was  sustained 
in  the  case  of  International  Tooth-Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond 
et  al.     (30  Fed.  Rep.,  775.) 

Patent,  No.  313,434,  to  James  E.  Low,  granted  March 
3d,  1885. 

Claims: — First.  In  combination  with  a  natural  tooth,  or 
teeth,  a  denture  provided  with  a  band,  or  bands,  perma- 
nently connected  to  said  natural  tooth  or  teeth,  and  having  a 
narrow  bearing  surface  fitted  to  rest  upon  the  hard  ridge  of 
the  jaw,  whereby  said  denture  is  supported  both  by  its  bear- 
ing upon  the  said  ridge  and  by  its  attachment  to  the  nat- 
ural tooth  or  teeth,  substantially  as  described. 

Second.  In  combination  with  the  permanently  secured 
denture  having  its  lower  surface  contracted  to  oppose  the  ridge 
of  the  jaw,  the  metallic  plate  fitted  accurately  to  the  jaw-sur- 
face and  secured  to  the  denture  and  to  the  band  or  bands  by 
which  the  denture  is  permanently  held  in  place,  substan- 
tially as  described. 

Remark  : — This  patent  was  granted  as  an  improvement 
upon  the  bridge-denture  patent,  isssued  to  James  Low, 
March  loth,  1881.  As  the  previous  patent  (No.  238,940)  was 
declared  valid  in  the  case  of  International  Tooth-Crown  Co. 
v.  Richmond,  this    improvement,    consisting    of  the    claims 


dental   jurisprudent  i:.  155 

granted  in  that  patent,  in  combination  with  the  bearing  sur- 
face (plate)  resting  upon  the  hard  ridge  of  the  jaw,  also  car- 
ries validity. 

Patent,  No.  336,230,  Charles  P.  Grout,  February  16th, 
1886. 

Claims : — First.  The  combination  of  two  metal  tooth- 
crowns,  adapted  to  be  secured  to  two  tooth-stumps,  and  a 
detachable  connection  between  the  crowns,  to  provide  for 
separately  placing  them  on  and  removing  them  from  their 
roots  or  stumps. 

Second.  The  combination,  with  a  dental  bridge  and  a 
tooth-crown  at  one  end  thereof,  both  forming  one  integral 
structure  of  another  tooth-crown,  upon  which  the  other  or 
free  end  of  the  bridge  is  supported,  and  capable  of  self-adjust- 
ment as  the  bridge  expands  or  contracts. 

Patent,  No.  318,579,  issued  to  Lucius  T.  Sheffield,  May 
26th,  1885. 

The  following  is  an  abstract  of  the  claims  granted : — In 
the  method  of  manufacturing  artificial  dentures,  fitting  the 
supporting  tooth-crowns  to  the  roots  and  teeth  in  the  mouth  ; 
preparing  a  cast  thereof ;  making  a  mould  from  the  said  cast 
representing  the  jaw ;  preparing  a  trial-plate  of  wax  ;  fitting 
the  said  mould  ;  mounting  thereupon  the  artificial  teeth 
which  are  to  form  the  bridge;  adjusting  said  artificial  teeth 
upon  said  trial-plate,  by  placing  the  said  trial-plate  in  the 
mouth  fitted  with  the  supporting  teeth,  thereby  securing  a 
proper  articulation,  and  then  investing  the  said  bridge-teeth 
and  the  said  supporting  teeth,  together  with  the  trial-plate 
in  the  mouth,  and  removing  them  together  ;  removing  the 
wax,  additionally  investing  the  teeth  sufficient  to  keep  them 
in  their  relative  positions,  and  then  soldering  the  denture  to- 
gether, making  a  completed  whole. 

Remark: — This  patent  rests  upon  a  combination  of  the 
methods  used  by  dentists  in  a  similar  class  of  mechanical 
operations. 

Being  a  combination  of  these  methods,  the  inventor  can 
claim  novelty   and   the   right   to  a  patent.     However,  the 


156  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENT  K. 

methods  can  be  varied  by  substitution  of  other  elements, 
without  infringement. 

Patent,  No.  318,581,  granted  May  26th,  1885,  to  W.  S. 
Sheffield,  for  a  support  for  artificial  dentures. 

Claim: — Improvement  in  the  manufacture  of  artificial 
dentures,  the  same  consisting  in  connecting  metallic  crowns 
adapted  to  the  teeth,  by  a  bar  extending  over  the  alveolar 
ridge ;  attaching  the  said  bar  to  a  plate  adapted  to  rest  upon 
a  portion  of  said  ridge,  and  mounting  the  artificial  teeth 
upon  said  bar,  etc. 

Remark : — The   validity  of  this  patent  is  questionable. 

Patent,  No.  319,238, granted  to  Chas.  P.  Grout,  June  2nd, 
1885.     Abstract  of  claims: 

The  method  of  obtaining  a  metal  fac- simile  of  natural 
tooth-roots,  or  stumps  on  which  to  fit  metallic  tooth-crowns, 
consisting  in  trimming  or  shaping  the  ends  of  natural  roots 
or  stumps  to  the  desired  form,  and  forming  in  them  pin-holes 
or  sockets;  then,  applying  soft  metal  tubes  to  the  roots  or 
stumps,  and  pressing  them  down  below  the  free  margin  of 
the  gum  ;  in  inserting  pins  in  the  holes  or  sockets ;  then,  tak- 
ing a  plaster  impression  of  the  natural  roots  or  stumps,  and 
the  soft  metal  tubes  and  pins  from  the  mouth,  and  in  finally 
casting  from  this  impression,  with  its  tubes  and  pins,  a  me- 
tallic facsimile  having  projections  in  which  are  holes  or  sock- 
ets, and  which  correspond  in  form  to  the  natural  roots  and 
stumps,  etc. 

Remark : — The  novelty  in  this  patented  method  consists 
in  the  adaptation  of  the  soft  metal  tubes  to  the  root-ends  to 
form  a  mould.  In  former  crown-methods,  a  gold  band  was 
fitted  to  the  root,  with  the  pin  in  position  in  the  socket.  A 
plaster  or  wax  impression  of  the  root  was  then  taken  ;  a 
model,  usually  plaster,  was  made  from  the  same,  with  the  pin 
and  band  in  position,  and  the  tooth  was  fitted  upon  the  said 
model. 

Patent,  No.  446,769,  granted  to  Joseph  W.  Clowes  (New 
York  City),  February  17th,  1891. 

Claims: — First.  An  improvement  in  dentistry,  which 
consists  in  combining  with  the  teeth  suitable  plastic  fillings, 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  157 

which  are  extended  between  the  teeth  and  are  moulded  upon 
the  gum. 

Second.  The  combination  with  connected  plastic  fill- 
ings inserted  in  two  or  more  teeth  of  a  strengthening  bar  in- 
serted in  the  teeth,  and  inclosed  in  the  plastic  tilling. 

Third.  The  combination  with  fillings  inserted  in  cavi- 
ties in  adjacent  teeth  of  a  connective  body  of  plastic  material, 
formed  integrally  with  the  filling  moulded  upon  the  gums, 
and  carved  in  imitation  of  teeth. 

Remark : — This  method  of  bridging  teeth  has  little 
novelty  to  sustain  the  patent.  A  strengthening  bar  inserted 
in  the  cavity  of  natural  teeth  and  inclosed  in  the  artificial 
tooth,  was  the  method  practiced  by  Bing,  and  the  Beale  Tooth- 
Crown  also  consisted  of  a  tooth  with  a  bar  baked  therein,  and 
having  its  ends  projecting  from  the  lateral  walls  of  the  tooth. 
The  mode  of  moulding  teeth  of  plastic  material  upon  the 
gum  is  merely  a  deviation  from  the  usual  methods.  It  is 
questionable  whether  such  methods  have  not  been  previously 
practiced  by  some  dentists. 

Patent,  No.  374,572,  granted  to  Stephen  T.  Beale,  Jr., 
Philadelphia,  Pa.,  December  13th,  1887. 

Claims: — First.  An  artificial  tooth  having  a  triangular 
shaped  bar  baked  into  the  body  thereof,  in  its  formation,  and 
extending  beyond  the  side  walls  of  said  tooth,  in  combination 
with  one  or  more  teeth,  having  metallic  backs  with  sockets 
and  anchor-posts. 

Second.  ■  An  artificial  tooth,  in  combination  with  a  hori- 
zontal bar  and  one  or  more  pins,  with  heads  which  are  held 
firmly  in  the  body  of  the  tooth,  and  the  opposite  ends  of  said 
bar  and  pins  extending  beyond  the  side  walls  of  the  tooth,  for 
attachment  to  a  tooth  having  a  similar  bar  and  pins  fitted 
into  the  same. 

Third.  The  combination  with  a  porcelain  tooth  and  a 
triangular  bar  running  horizontally  through  said  tooth  of 
one  or  more  pins,  the  heads  of  which  are  imbedded  into  the 
body  of  the  tooth,  in  its  formation,  and  extended  from  the 
side  walls  thereof,  and  a  platinum  or  other  plate  attached  to 
laid  bar  and  pins. 


158  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

Remark  : — The  artificial  tooth  is  similar  in  construction 
to  the  Bing  tooth,  in  which  the  bar  or  pins  are  baked  in  the 
body  of  the  tooth,  and  extended  from  the  side  walls  thereof; 
the  difference  is  in  the  shape  of  the  bar  and  method  of  soldering 
the  teeth  together.  The  inventor  has  not  operated  the  patent 
to  the  extent  of  claiming  royalty,  and  the  belief  is  that  it  has 
been  abandoned  to  the  profession. 

Patents  for  Removable  Bridge-Denture. 

Patent,  No.  365,764,  granted  June  28th,  1887,  to  J.  A. 
Throckmorton,  for  clasps  extending  over  the  alveolar  process, 
to  retain  the  plate  in  place. 

Claim  : — The  combination,  with  a  whole  or  partial  plate 
of  artificial  denture,  of  one  or  more  metallic  clasping  plates 
(clasps)  extending  from  the  inner  or  outer  margin  of  the 
denture,  as  described,  said  clasping  plates  being  bent  or 
curved  over  the  alveolar  process  and  gums  of  the  upper  jaw, 
or  the  buccal  side,  or  under  the  parts  at  the  lingual  side  of 
the  posterior  position  of  the  lower  jaw,  substantially  as  here- 
in set  forth. 

Remark : — The  use  of  clasps  in  bridge-dentures  has 
been  in  vogue,  in  removable  plates  and  bridges,  more  than 
fifty  years  previous  to  the  date  of  the  granting  of  this  patent. 
The  clasps  extending  over  the  alveolar  process  is,  in  a 
measure,  novel,  though  it  is  but  a  modification  of  the 
method  of  allowing  a  metal  plate  to  extend  over  the  alveolar 
process,  both  deriving  support  by  the  same  means. 

Patent,  No.  421,116,  granted  to  John  A.  Throckmorton, 
February  11th,  1890. 

Claim: — The  removable  bridge-work  for  artificial  den- 
ture,  substantially  as  herein  described  and  shown,  with  clasp- 
ing arms  for  attachment  to  natural  teeth,  or  plates  extending 
from  the  inner  or  outer  margin  of  the  bridge-work,  and 
adapted  to  clasp  over  the  alveolar  process  of  the  gums,  as  set 
forth. 

Remark: — The  criticism  appended  to  patent, No.  365,764, 
applies  as  well  to  the  above  described  patent,  as  the  claims 
granted  therein  are  for  the  adaptation  of  the  same  principle 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  159 

granted  in  patent,  No.  365,764,  applied  to  a  different  form  of 
denture.  These  patents,  No.  365,764  and  No.  421,116,  are 
being  operated  by  the  inventor,  i.  e.,  a  royalty  is  charged  for 
the  use  of  the  method. 

Patent,  No.  352,653,  granted  to  John  J.  Stedman,  May 
19th,  1891,  for  an  artificial  denture  having  the  last  molars 
omitted  therefrom,  and  having  incased  spring  mechanism 
located  between  its  plates  in  the  position  of  the  lost  molars. 

Remark: — It  is  an  old  method  to  fasten  spiral  springs 
to  upper  and  lower  dentures,  thus  connecting  them,  and  hold 
the  plates  in  position.    The  patent  is  an  improvement  thereon. 

Patent,  No.  424,924,  granted  to  George  L.  Curtis,  for  a 
removable  bridge-denture,  consisting  of  the  combination  of 
a  divided  truss  supported  upon  natural  roots  or  crowns  of 
teeth,  with  a  bridge  or  crown  removably  secured  to  said  di- 
vided truss  ;  said  crowns  having  slots  to  engage  the  arms  or 
trusses. 

Remark  : — This  method  of  removably  securing  bridge- 
dentures  is  novel,  and  hence  the  patent  is  valid.  The  belief 
is  that  the  inventor  has  abandoned  this  invention  to  the  pro- 
fession. 

Patent,  No.  390,521,  for  removable  bridge  for  artificial 
dentures, granted  October  2nd,  1888,  to  Cassius  M.  Richmond, 
assignor  to  the  International  Tooth-Crown  Co. 

Claims : — First.  The  combination  of  the  prepared  root 
having  a  sealing  metallic  cap,  hermetically  sealing  the  same, 
and  a  removable  bridge  fitting  the  face  of  said  metallic  cap, 
and  provided  with  a  pin  permanently  secured  thereto,  and 
entering  within  the  metallically  sealed  cavity  of  the  tooth, 
substantially  as  described. 

Second.  The  combination  of  a  prepared  root  having  its 
end  metallically  hermetically  sealed,  a  dental  bridge  adapted 
to  fit  the  same  at  one  end  and  provided  with  a  support  at  the 
other,  adapted  to  rest  upon  the  supporting  surface  of  a  tooth 
or  root,  substantially  as  described. 

Third.  The  combination  in  a  removable  dental  bridge  of 
u  prepared  root  having  its  end  hermetically  sealed,  with  a  suit- 
able terminal  support  on  the  said  bridge  fitting  said  root, the 


160  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

said  bridge  being  provided  at  its  other  end  with  a  clasping 
attachment  connecting  it  to  a  supporting  tooth  or  terminal, 
substantially  as  described. 

Patent  granted  to  Geo.  V.  I.  Brown,  March  16th,  1886, 
for  dental  bridge-work. 

Claims : — The  process  in  the  manufacture  of  artificial 
dentures  of  fitting  silver  bands  to  the  permanent  teeth,  mak- 
ing a  plaster  cast  of  the  jaws,  with  the  bands  attached  ;  then, 
removing  the  bands,  adjusting  them  to  the  model  of  the 
permanent  teeth  on  the  cast ;  waxing  up  such  artificial  teeth 
as  may  lie  necessary ;  investing  the  cast  and  artificial  teeth 
in  a  flask  ;  removing:  the  wax  and  casting  about  the  teeth 
and  bands  a  molten  alio}7,  forming  the  metal  bridge  without 
backing  or  the  use  of  solder — all  as  and  for  the  purpose  set 
forth  and  described. 

Patent,  Xo.  315,656,  granted  to  Philip  A.  Palmer,  April 
14th,  1885. 

Claim : — A  natural  tooth  provided  with  a  protective 
band  or  cover  permanently  secured  thereto,  in  combination 
with  a  removable  partial  artificial  denture,  provided  with 
one  or  more  fastenings,  whereby  the  natural  teeth  will  not 
be  clasped  directly. 

Remark: — This  patent  provides  for  banding  the  natural 
tooth  permanently,  to  prevent  the  abrasion  of  the  tooth 
caused  by  the  friction  of  the  clasps.  Its  validity  is  ques- 
tionable. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 


161 


a 
o 

u 

O 


o 
o 

a 


*S         -B    aS 


P>  m  r-i. 


5  "5 


■3       5  "3  .g  _ 

&■     §  *  S  * 


3  -5 


5  £ 


.■S  tin  is  5    a>         +»  -0 


5*    3    3 


>  o 

bo  *"    tj 

1  s 


g  p 


bO 


°*    3    3 


cp    OS    3 

a   bo  ** 


^      T-i  .a 


a  a  -m  5 


•g  a  * 


Sfi    li    o    S    u 

a  ~  a  2  B  .s 
r  s  r  a  -  * 


2  * 


*  -3 

o  ,™ 


fl« 

«  -<! 

tfS 

»  BS 

wo, 

t«^ 

HS5 

Co 

0_  OS 

o  < 

«  o 

p  a 

corr 
z 


162 


I'KN'I  A.L    JURISPRUDENCE. 


•a       p.     ja 


s,  - 


-  -    —    '—  —     "* 

Z  g  -  5  5  r 

'■=  -  _  p   - 

-  >,  r-  *  g 

.2  £  S  S  So 

?   5   -   >■  S    ■ 

~~  --=  5  § 

t.  —    B    ■/  a    £ 

||    ||  *| 

3   6*5  "7    — 

5  £."  " 


S      * 


u 

M 

- 

r. 
bl) 

— 

_ 

i 

9 

o 

o 

— 

B 

u 
o 

_3 

f 

; 

0) 

— 

~ 

bl 

Pi 

?i 

— 

-= 

( 

- 
— 

be 

be 

gd 

be 

3 

= 

e 

ft 

a 

= 

0 
o 

3 

B 

s 

V 

B 

— ' 
"5 

o 

7. 

"5 

at 
; 

s 

"3 

U 
,0 

§ 

- 

$ 

00 

bl 

- 

"■ 

I- 

- 

- 

z. 

:i. 

s 

K 

_■ 

u 

" 

I 

a 
"5 

- 

•2 

a 

7" 

S 

~ 

o 

- 

-' 

6 

43 

£  1 
0) 

s 

1 

; 

9) 

nd 

R 

g 
- 

— 

0) 

5 
— 
a 

a 

5 
be 

a 

u 
u 

s 

5 
IT 

a 

0) 

B 

~ 

~ 

V, 

g 

£1 

- 

u: 

a  i'. 

S 

= 

•3 

f- =  Z  c 


«    *B    = 


- 


0) 


.=S  t:         r- 


5  3  >°  2 

»  S  g  g  i/- 

-  bo  s  a  g 

b  s  a  ■§  a 

-  -    T  —   • 

_,  O   -    '  -r 

3  be  a  .E  s 
■p  —  .- 


-    "-■    _   ^3 


05         ~Z   ~    2    —  3 

s  5  "&  I     '>  '--  -  ^      & 


2   i 


—     w     > 

a  w  r; 

«  C-  (C 


£  « 


-  **  S  *  "S  19 

=  I  I  £  =  1 

I  §  -sis    1 

tl  iJiSs  ^ 


_    v 

d  3 
1  = 


-     = 


»  £ 


S  -  ^         <w>         - 

-  ^  i  <  <  -  - 

lis  1 1.  ►  1 

b  •&  g  I  g  2  "3 

«d«  S  p  "  -g 

1  ?  3  jj  5  !  " 


o  o 


s  & 

=  &. 

J. 

g     ~  1 

B       —  Ui 


-.     ' 


1*3  J  J* 

3       £  £  = 

-       ?  *  1 

O  IB  Oi   C 


cc  .•  c 

t  «>    . 
-  C  ^.^. 

H  °  ^s 

c    .E  '- 

us  V-Ql,  a 
a  ~^_  & 

"  c  O  - 

geoo 


B  _    . 

W   r,    S 


£gas 


V.    > 


1'ENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE. 


165 


PATENTEE. 

NO.    OF    PATENT. 

DATE   OF   ISSUE- 

1. 

J.  Logan, 

310,294, 

January 

6,  1885 

2. 

E.  Parmley-Brown, 

423,467, 

March 

18,  1890 

3. 

Cassius  M.  Richmond, 

346,316, 

July 

27,  1886 

4. 

A.  C.  Fones, 

455,450, 

July 

7,  1891 

5. 

Cassius  M.  Richmond, 

351,071, 

October 

19,  1886 

6. 

Charles  P.  Grout, 

354,833, 

December 

21,  1886 

7. 

Moses  Rynear, 

342,761, 

May 

25,  1886 

8. 

James  E.  Low, 

376,603, 

January 

1?,  1888 

9. 

Genese. 

430,522, 

June 

17,  1890 

1U. 

Arthur  E.  Mattison, 

280,052, 

June 

26,  1883 

11. 

Cassius  M.  Richmond, 

392,226, 

May 

22,  1883 

12. 

S.  B.  Dewey, 

409,671, 

August 

27,  1890 

13. 

Cassius  M.  Richmond, 

277,941, 

May 

22,  1883 

14. 

E.  T.  Starr, 

342,271, 

May 

18,  1886 

15. 

W.  H.  Gates, 

•      163,913, 

June 

29,  1875 

16. 

Calvin  S.  Case, 

328,837, 

October 

20,  1885 

17. 

Lucius  T.  Sheffield, 

354,356, 

December 

14,  1886 

18. 

Lucius  T.  Sheffield, 

354,357, 

December 

14,  1886 

19. 

Cassius  M.  Richmond, 



November 

6,  1888 

20. 

J.  J.  Patrick, 

380,512, 

April 

3,  1888 

21. 

George  L.  Curtis, 

424,050, 

March 

25,  1890 

22. 

Charles  P.  Grout, 

333,216, 

December 

29,  1885 

23. 

A.  W.  Day, 

388,269, 

August 

28,  1888 

24. 

J.  B.  Beers, 

144,182, 

November 

4,  1873 

25. 

W.  G.  A.  Bonwill, 

238,334, 

March 

1,  1881 

26. 

W.  S.  How, 

313,737, 

March 

10,  1885 

27. 

H.  C.  Register, 

319,946, 

June 

9,  1885 

28. 

M.  W.  Williams, 

317,2o9, 

May 

5,  1885 

29. 

Calvin  S.  Case, 

282,640, 

August 

7,  1883 

30. 

W.  S.  How, 

313,738, 

March 

10,  1885 

31. 

C.  S.  Hulburt, 

377,855, 

February 

14,  1888 

32. 

Charles  P.  Grout, 



August 

24,  1886 

33. 

George  W.  Evans, 

373,346, 

November 

15,  1887 

34. 

Moses  Rynear, 

305,238, 

September 

16,  1884 

35. 

Henry  Lawrence, 

6,406, 

May 

1,  1849 

36. 

T.  S.  Waters, 

377,970, 

February 

14,  1888 

37. 

Charles  E.  Blake,  Sr., 

355,126, 

December 

28,  1886 

38. 

Charles  P.  Grout, 

319,236, 

June 

2,  1885 

As  it  is  an  impossibility  to  give  an  individual  descrip- 
tion of  each  patented  tooth-crown,  the  above  classification 
has  been  arranged,  embracing  all  such  patents.  Referring 
thereto,  it  will  be  noticed  that  nearly  all  forms  of  tooth, 
crowns  used  by  dentists  have  been  patented. 


104  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

D. — A    LEGAL  INTERPRETATION  OF   CROWN  AND  BRIDGE    PATENTS. 

The  legal  position  of  the  dental  practitioner  with  regard 
to  certain  crown  and  bridge  patents,  in  view  of  the  decisions 
of  Judges  Wallace  and  Shipman  in  the  suit  of  International 
Tooth-Crown  Co.  r.  Richmond  et  a!,  receives  an  answer  in 
that  important  case. 

This  decision  declaring  the  two  patents,  Xos.  277,941 
and  277,943,  granted  to  Cassius  M.  Richmond,  for  tooth- 
crowns,  invalid,  practically  makes  free  the  wdiole  system  of 
tooth-crowning,  where  a  metal  band  is  used  to  encircle  the 
tooth-root,  or  a  metal  cap  to  cover  the  end  of  the  root,  and 
any  tooth-crown  consisting  of  a  metal  band  or  cap  covering 
the  end  of  the  root,  in  combination  with  a  metal  backing  and 
porcelain  facing,  or  any  varieties  of  this  form  of  crown. 
This  decision  should  annul  certain  patents  for  "  tooth-crown- 
ing methods,"  which  are  but  improvements  upon  this  system. 

Regarding  bridge-dentures,  the  decision  in  International 
Tooth- Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond,  declaring  the  patent,  ISTo. 
277,933,  to  Alvan  S.  Richmond,  for  "bridge,"  an  infringe- 
ment of  a  patent,  Xo.  238,940,  granted  to  James  E.  Low, 
makes  this  latter  patent  the  key  to  all  forms  of  "  permanent 
bridge-dentures,  supported  at  one  or  more  points  by  caps  or 
bands,"  cemented  on  adjoining  teeth,  without  dependencies 
on  the  gum  beneath. 

The  current  belief  of  competent  experts  and  that  of  the 
author  is,  that  evidence  and  arguments  can  be  presented  to 
show  that  the  claims  granted  in  the  Low  patent  are  too  broad, 
and  the  construction  and  interpretation  of  these  claims  in  the 
decision  given  in  the  case  of  International  Tooth-Crown  Co. 
v.  Richmond,  allow  the  patentee  more  than  he  is  justly  en- 
titled to. 

The  annexed  abstract  of  this  case  contains  the  decision 
of  the  four  patents  alleged  to  be  infringed : 

United  States  Circuit  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York. 
In  the  case  of  International  Tooth-Crown  Company  v. 
Richmond  et  al  (30  Fed.  Rep.,  775),  before  Wallace  and  Ship- 
man,  J.  J.,  Wallace,  J.:     (United  States,  etc.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  165 

"  The  complainant  is  the  owner  of  four  patents  relating 
to  improvements  in  the  dental  art,  all  of  which  are  alleged 
to  be  infringed  by  the  defendants.  This  suit  is  brought  for 
an  injunction  and  accounting. 

"  The  first  of  the  patents  in  suit  was  granted  to  James 
E.  Low,  March  15th,  1881,  upon  an  application  filed  Decem- 
ber 20th,  1889.  The  subject  is  an  improvement  in  dentistry, 
whereby  artificial  dental  surfaces  may  be  permanently  fixed 
in  the  mouth  in  place  of  lost  teeth,  without  the  use  of  plates 
or  other  means  of  deriving  support  from  the  gum  beneath 
the  artificial  denture.  The  patentee  refers  in  his  specifica- 
tion to  the  preexisting  state  of  the  art." 

[A  part  of  the  patent  is  then  quoted,  and  the  Judge  pro- 
ceeds :] 

"  It  is  entirely  clear  that  the  invention  described  in  the 
patent  was  not  only  new  and  useful,  but  was  an  improve- 
ment in  the  dental  art  of  considerable  merit. 

"  The  former  methods  of  supporting  artificial  teeth  re- 
ferred to  in  the  patent,  were  not  designed  to  secure  a  perma- 
nent attachment  of  the  artificial  tooth  to  the  natural  teeth, 
but  were  intended  to  secure  a  removable  attachment,  the  the- 
ory of  many  dentists  being  that  a  rigid  attachment  was  un- 
desirable and  impracticable,  as  unclean  and,  also,  as  liable 
to  produce  inflammation  of  the  natural  teeth.  The  methods 
which  had  been  employed  to  secure  a  permanent  or  rigid  at- 
tachment of  the  artificial  to  the  natural  teeth,  were  well  cal- 
culated to  excite  the  distrust  and  opposition  of  intelligent 
dentists.  One  of  these  is  described  in  an  article,  of  which 
W.  H.  IT.  Eliot  was  the  author,  published  in  March,  1844r 
in  '  The  American  Journal  of  Dental  Science.'  This  de- 
scribes an  artificial  denture  consisting  of  three  teeth,  fastened 
upon  a  backing  of  metal.  The  extreme  teeth,  or  the  ones  at 
each  end  of  the  artificial  denture,  are  provided  each  with  a 
pin.  The  pins  are  to  go  into  holes  drilled  in  the  prepaid! 
roots  of  natural  teeth,  and  in  this  way  the  denture  is  to  be 
held  in  place.  A  slight  bearing  surface  is  formed  by  plates 
which  are  to  bear  upon  the  smooth  ends  of  the  natural  roots 
remaining    in    the   gum.     This   denture   simply  consists  of 


166  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

teeth  held  in  by  pivots  and  connected  by  a  bar  or  backing 
of  metal.  Another  of  these  methods  is  described  in  the 
United  States  patent  to  Benjamin  J.  Bing,  of  January  23d, 
1871.  This  method  consists  in  attaching  artificial  bars, 
which  bars  at  either  end  are  to  be  secured  to  natural  teeth 
by  forming  cavities  in  the  natural  teeth,  inserting  the  ends 
of  the  l>ars  in  the  cavities,  and  then  tilling  the  cavities  with 
gold. 

"  The  objection  to  the  use  of  plates  and  other  methods  of 
supporting  the  artificial  tooth  by  the  gum,  are  sufficiently 
pointed  out  in  the  patent,  and  the  objections  to  methods  like 
those  of  Eliot  and  Bing  for  supporting  the  artificial  teeth  by 
a  permanent  attachment  to  natural  teeth,  or  the  roots  of 
such  teeth,  are  obvious.  Where  pivots  are  inserted  in  the 
teeth  to  secure  a  rigid  attachment,  as  in  the  Eliot  method, 
they  become  loosened  in  the  process  of  mastication,  and  the 
teeth  are  liable  to  be  split  by  a  sidewise  wrench  or  motion. 
Such  methods  as  Bing's  tend  to  the  destruction  of  the  adja- 
cent natural  teeth,  the  strain  and  motion  in  mastication 
loosening  the  metal  fillings,  and  requiring  a  re-attachment  of 
the  denture,  from  time  to  time,  to  the  increasing  injury  of 
the  natural  teeth. 

"By  the  method  of  the  patent,  a  plate  is  dispensed  with 
when  some  natural  teeth  remain,  and  instead  of  the  artificial 
teeth  being  loosely  clasped  to  the  adjacent  natural  teeth, 
they  are  attached  with  strength  and  permanency,  and  are  not 
forced  into  contact  with  the  gum  during  the  strain  of  masti- 
cation.  By  being  firmly  fixed  upon  bands  of  metal,  secured 
rigidly  and  permanently  by  cement,  or  otherwise,  upon  the 
adjacent  natural  teeth,  which  they  surround,  the  denture  has 
an  easy  and  efficient  bearing,  the  gum  escapes  injury,  and 
the  strain  of  mastication  is  transferred  to  the  natural  teeth. 
When  the  natural  teeth  employed  have  their  surface  adja- 
cent to  the  gum  cut  away  at  the  back,  and  only  descend  to 
contact  with  the  gum  along  the  front  edge,  another  advan- 
tage results ;  because  the  small  area  covered  by  the  bases  of 
the  teeth  precludes  such  an  accumulation  of  food  or  other 
foreign  matter  between  the  gum  and  the  denture  as  cannot  be 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  167 

readily  removed.  It  is  not  contested  that  Low  was  the  first  to 
devise  and  perfect  the  improvement  described  in  the  patent ; 
but  it  is  urged  that,  in  view  of  the  prior  state  of  the  art,  as 
described  by  the  publications  referred  to,  and  as  also  de- 
scribed by  the  publications  of  Lintott,  Scott,  Fowell,  and 
others,  the  improvement  of  Low  did  not  involve  invention. 
The  references  to  the  publications  of  Lintott,  Scott,  and 
Fowell  are  not  of  sufficient  importance  to  require  comment. 
Undoubtedly,  Low  was  materially  assisted  in  perfecting  his 
invention  by  his  observations  of  the  artificial  crown  of  Dr. 
Richmond,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  invention  derives 
its  chief  value  from  its  adaptability  to  use  with  the  Rich- 
mond crown.  It  may  not  have  involved  a  high  order  of  in- 
ventive faculty  to  work  out  the  conception,  by  connecting 
such  crowns  by  a  bar  or  bridge  bearing  an  artificial  tooth  or 
teeth.  Nevertheless,  the  fact  remains  that  Dr.  Low  was  the 
first  to  accomplish  successfully  what  skilled  dentists,  like  Dr. 
Rich,  did  not  believe  to  be  practicable,  and  to  demonstrate 
how  the  objections,  which  were  supposed  to  be  so  serious  to 
the  method  of  rigid  attachment,  could  be  obviated.  It  is  not 
difficult  after  the  fact  to  show,  b}-  argument,  how  simple  the 
achievement  was,  and,  by  aggregating  all  the  failures  of 
others,  to  point  out  the  plain  and  easy  road  to  success.  This 
is  the  wisdom  after  the  event  that  often  confutes  invention 
and  levels  it  to  the  plane  of  mere  mechanical  skill.  This  inge- 
nious argument  in  this  case  has  not  satisfied  us  that  there  was 
no  invention  in  the  improvement  of  Low. 

"  The  defense  is  relied  on  that  the  invention  had  been  in 
public  use  for  more  than  two  years  before  the  application  for 
the  patent.  The  proofs  show  that  operations  were  performed 
by  Low  during  the  latter  part  of  the  year  1877,  in  which  he 
Inserted  the  dentures  of  the  patent  in  the  mouths  of  patients. 
As  the  application  upon  which  the  patent  was  granted  was 
not  filed  until  December  20th,  1880,  the  defense  would  be  es- 
tablished, were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  Low  had  made  an  ap- 
plication, which  was  filed  in  the  Patent  Office  January  6th, 
1879,  which  had  never  been  abandoned,  for  substantially  the 
same  invention.     That  application  contained  some  matters 


168  TiKNTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

foreign  to  the  subject  of  the  second  application,  but  so  far 
as  it  related  to  the  inventions  covered  by  the  claims  of  the 
patent,  it  did  not  differ  from  the  second  application,  except 
in  a  single  particular.  The  specification  of  the  patent  states 
that  non-contact  of  the  artificial  tooth  or  denture  carried  by 
the  bridge,  with  the  gum,  or  the  absence  of  pressure  upon 
the  gums,  is  one  of  the  advantages  of  the  invention ;  while  it 
was  stated  in  the  first  application  to  be  necessary  '  to  care- 
fully fit  the  base  of  the  tooth  or  block  to  be  inserted  to  the 
jaw,  and,  when  secured,  it  should  be  so  pressed  down  as  to 
leave  no  space  beneath  it  for  the  admission  of  food.'  The 
statement  in  the  first  application  is  not  inconsistent  with  the 
method  of  the  patent,  which  consists  in  attaching  the  artifi- 
cial tooth  or  the  denture  to  bands,  and  supporting  them  by 
the  adjoining  permanent  teeth,  '  without  dependence  upon 
the  gum  beneath.'  So  long  as  this  essential  feature  of  the  in- 
vention is  retained,  it  is  quite  immaterial  whether  the  artifi- 
cial denture  '  is  so  pressed  down  as  to  leave  no  space  beneath 
it  for  the  admission  of  food,'  in  the  language  of  the  speci- 
fication, or  whether  it  is  in  positive  non-contact  with  the 
gum.  When  the  artificial  denture  is  in  non-contact  with  the 
gum,  cleanliness  is  facilitated,  and  the  suggestion  which  was 
first  made  in  the  second  application  was,  therefore,  a  useful 
one.  But  it  did  not  change  the  invention  in  essentials.  Al- 
though the  tooth  or  denture  is  pressed  down  so  close  to 
the  jaw  that  food  cannot  lodge  between  it  and  the  gum,  it 
is  still  supported  by  the  adjacent  tooth  or  teeth,  and  not  by 
the  gum.  As  was  stated  in  the  first  application,  '  the  yield- 
ing surface  on  which  it  rests  will  readily  conform  to  the 
tooth  or  block,  and  any  pain  at  first  induced  by  the  pressure 
will  disappear.' 

"  There  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  Low  intended  to  aban- 
don his  first  application.  His  application  being  refused,  cor- 
respondence ensued  with  the  Patent  Office,  and  finally  Low 
made  a  personal  visit  to  the  office,  had  an  interview  with  the 
Examiner,  and  convinced  the  Examiner  that  the  invention 
which  was  the  subject  of  the  application  was  meritorious 
and  novel,  and  one  for  which  he  was  entitled  to  a  patent. 


PENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  169 

During  the  controversy  with  the  Patent  Office,  various  in- 
terpolations had  been  made  in  the  first  application,  and  the 
Examiner  suggested  that  Low  had  better  make  a  new  appli- 
cation, and  thereupon  the  second  application  was  drawn  up. 
So  far  as  relates  to  the  present  invention,  the  new  applcia- 
tion  differed  from  the  first  merely  in  omitting  some  super- 
fluous matters,  and  in  changing  the  description  in  reference 
to  the  character  of  the  contact  between  the  denture  and  the 
gum.  There  was  no  act  on  the  part  of  Low  which  was 
equivalent  to  a  withdrawal  of  his  first  application  or  to  an 
acquiescence  in  its  rejection.  He  merely  made  a  new  appli- 
cation as  a  more  convenient  way  of  presenting  the  original 
application  for  the  final  action  of  the  office,  after  he  had 
been  assured  that  the  rejection  of  his  first  application  would 
be  considered  and  a  patent  would  be  granted  for  the  present 
invention.  Both  applications  are  to  be  considered  as  parts  of 
one  continuous  proceeding,  and  the  two  years  within  which 
the  invention  could  not  be  publicly  used  without  invalidating 
the  patent,  did  not  begin  to  run  until  January  9th,  1879. 
(Godfrey  v.  Eames,  1  Wall,  317 ;  Smith  v.  Goodyear  Co.,  93 
IJ.  S.,  500;  Graham  v.  Geneva  Lake  Co.,  11  Fed.,  138.) 

"  The  second  claim  includes,  with  the  elements  of  the  first 
one,  the  features  of  a  tooth  cut  away  at  the  back.  Thus 
construed,  the  defendants  infringe  both  claims  of  this  patent. 

"  The  next  patent  in  suit,  which  may  be  most  conveniently 
considered,  is  No.  277,941,  granted  May  22nd,  1883,  to  Cassius 
M.  Richmond,  assignor,  etc.  The  application  for  this  patent 
was  filed  December  1st,  1882.  This  patent  is  for  the  inven- 
tion known  in  the  dental  profession  as  the  Richmond  Tooth- 
Crown.  A  ]  latent  was  granted  to  Richmond,  dated  February 
10th,  1880,  for  an  artificial  tooth-crown,  and  the  present  in- 
vention is  said  to  be  for  an  improvement  upon  the  tooth- 
crown  therein  described, but  it  is,  in  fact,  for  a  radically  differ- 
ent tooth-crown.  The  invention  relates  to  an  improved  method 
or  device  for  attaching  such  crowns  to  the  roots  of  stumps 
of  natural  teeth  remaining  in  the  mouth,  the  object  being  to 
provide  an  artificial  crown  of  improved  construction  to  be 
adjusted  and  secured  to  the  root  of  the  natural  tooth,  in  a 


170  DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE. 

permanent,  practical,  artistic  manner,  so  that  the  tooth,  when 
finished,  will  present  a  natural  appearance  and  be  capable  of 
the  same  service  as  a  sound  natural  tooth.  After  the  natural 
root  or  stump  has  been  cut  off  or  ground,  preferably  on  a  level 
with  the  gum,  and  a  hole  is  drilled  therein,  into  which  a  pin 
is  to  be  subsequently  inserted,  a  metallic  ferrule  is  then 
fitted  upon  and  shaped  to  the  prepared  root  of  the  tooth.  A 
suitable  crown  is  then  selected  to  be  applied  to  the  root 
(color,  size,  and  shape  being  consulted),  in  order  to  make  it  con- 
form, in  ap]  tearanee,  to  and  as  a  substitute  for  a  natural  tooth. 
The  artificial  crown  is  provided  with  a  metallic  back  or 
attachment,  which  has  holes  through  it  to  allow  the  passage 
of  the  pins,  which  are  firmly  imbedded  into  porcelain.  The 
root  and  crown  having  been  so  prepared,  the  crown  is 
placed  in  position  and  attached  to  the  ferrule  by  wax, 
sufficiently  to  hold  the  crown  firmly  in  position  to  allow 
of  the  removal  of  the  ferrule.  Then  a  suitable  pin,  designed 
to  be  inserted  in  the  hole  drilled  in  the  root,  is  im- 
bedded in  the  wax.  The  prepared  crown  is  then  invested  or 
protected  by  a  suitable  cover  of  marble  dust  and  plaster, 
leaving  the  wax  portion  exposed.  This  investiture  will  hold 
the  parts  in  the  position  which  they  are  to  occupy  in  the 
mouth.  The  wax  is  then  melted  from  the  pin  and  crown, 
and  replaced  by  a  suitable  gold  solder,  which  may  be  blown 
in  a  blowpipe  and  fused  around  the  pin.  This  solder  will 
unite  with  the  pin  extending  into  the  root,  the  ferrule,  the 
pin  extending  into  the  porcelain,  and  the  porcelain  back- 
ing, making  a  solid  backing  to  the  crown  and  firmly  holding 
all  the  parts  together.  The  prepared  crown  is  then  slipped 
upon  the  prepared  root  and  cemented  thereon,  the  ferrule, 
when  placed  in  position,  projecting  along  the  very  margin  of 
the  gum,  sufficiently  to  protect  the  root  from  decay  and  to 
conceal  the  ferrule  from  view.'' 

[The  patent  is  then  quoted  from,  and  the  opinion  pro- 
ceeds :] 

"  It  is  not  open  to  doubt  that  this  patent  describes  an  in- 
vention in  dentistry  of  the  greatest  utility  and  value.  The 
invention   enables   an    artificial  tooth  to  be  placed  upon  a 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  171 

natural  root,  which  can  only  be  distinguished  from  the  natural 
tooth  by  the  most  critical  examination,  which  is  as  service- 
able while  it  lasts  as  a  natural  tooth,  and  which  is  very  dur- 
able. The  Richmond  crown  not  only  supplies  the  place  of  a 
natural  tooth  for  the  purposes  of  use  so  as  to  be  a  perfect 
substitute  for  a  lost  tooth,  but  it  can  be  so  artistically  made 
as  in  any  instance  to  be  an  improvement,  in  appearance,  upon 
the  natural  tooth.  Nevertheless,  if  the  patent  can  be  sustained 
as  valid  to  any  extent,  it  can  only  be  upheld  by  placing  a 
very  narrow  limitation  upon  the  claims. 

"  Without  referring  at  present  to  the  state  of  the  art  at 
the  time  Dr.  Richmond  conceived  the  inventions  of  the  pat- 
ent in  1880,  and  of  the  present  patent,  it  suffices  to  say  that 
everything  which  is  the  subject  of  the  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth 
claims  of  the  present  patent,  had  been  in  prior  public  use  for 
more  than  two  years  prior  to  the  application  for  the  patent, 
and  was  public  property  prior  to  the  year  1880  ;  and  if  the 
remaining  claims  are  valid,  it  is  only  because  an  inclosing  cap 
by  which  the  end  of  the  root  is  hermetically  sealed,  and  thus 
protected  from  the  action  of  the  fluids  of  the  mouth,  is  an 
element  of  each  claim.  The  inventor  himself  had  aban- 
doned all  the  rest  of  his  invention  to  the  public.  As  early 
as  in  December,  1876,  Dr.  Richmond  had  inserted  a  denture 
in  the  mouth  of  a  patient  in  San  Francisco,  involving  the 
principle  of  the  patent.  That  denture  differed  from  the  arti- 
ficial tooth-crown  of  the  patent  only  because  the  inclosing 
ferrule  or  band  was  not  a  cap  which  covered  the  end  of  the 
root,  and  did  not  extend  so  far  under  the  gum  of  the  patient 
as  to  wholly  conceal  the  gold  surface.  The  denture  as  then 
inserted  by  him  was  a  complete  practical  success,  and,  so  far 
as  is  known,  still  remains  in  use  in  the  mouth  of  the  patient. 
In  the  years  1878  and  1879,  Dr.  Richmond  practiced  the  inven- 
tion extensively  in  many  of  the  large  cities  of  the  United  States, 
and  demonstrated  to  hundreds  of  dentists  in  public  clinics  and 
private  practice  the  method  of  preparing  and  inserting  his 
artificial  tooth-crowns.  The  method  was  practiced  with  dif- 
ferences of  detail,  but  was  always  the  same  in  essentials.  The 
root  was  always  prepared  in  the  way  pointed  out  in  the  pat- 


172  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

ent,  and  the  denture  always  consisted  of  a  ferrule  or  band 
accurately  fitted  to  surround  the  root,  to  which  was  soldered 
a  crown  with  a  porcelain  front  having  a  pin  extending  into 
the  root,  the  whole  being  cemented  on  the  root  in  one  piece. 
Sometimes  a  loose  floor  of  platinum  or  gold  was  packed  in- 
side the  band  behind  the  backing  of  the  porcelain  front,  so 
as  to  make  a  floor  above  the  solder  when  the  crown  was  in- 
vested in  position  and  the  solder  blown  in ;  and  sometimes 
instead  of  a  loose  floor  a  half  floor  was  joined  to  the  band 
extending  partly  over  the  end  of  the  root,  forming  a  cap  em- 
bracing part  of  the  exposed  end  of  the  root,  and  the  solder 
was  then  blown  in  under  the  cap.  When  made  in  either  of 
these  ways,  the  denture  consisted  of  a  porcelain  tooth  at- 
tached to  a  ring  of  gold  at  its  upper  part,  and  where  the 
porcelain  itself  met  the  ring,  there  was  no  solid  floor  to  the 
ring,  but  the  porcelain  itself  impinged  upon  the  ring. 

"  Among  those  to  whom  Dr.  Richmond  taught  the  in- 
vention, was  Dr.  Gaylord,a  dentist,  one  of  the  defendants  in 
this  cause.  Two  original  dentures  made  by  Dr.  Gay  lord 
and  inserted  in  the  mouths  of  patients,  one  in  April,  1879, 
and  the  other  in  May,  1879,  have  been  produced  in  evidence 
and  identified,  and  the  fact  that  these  tooth-crowns  were 
made  and  inserted  at  those  dates  and  were  practical  and  suc- 
cessful operations,  and  that  with  a  single  exception  both 
were  in  all  respects  the  tooth-crowns  of  the  patent,  inserted 
according  to  the  method  of  the  patent,  is  clearly  established. 
It  is  conceded  by  the  expert  for  the  complainant,  that  if  these 
dentures  had  been  made  with  a  ring  or  ferrule  having  a  com- 
plete floor  embracing  the  exposed  end  of  the  root,  they  would 
be  the  tooth-crowns  of  the  patent.  One  of  them  has  a  half 
floor  of  platinum  back  of  the  porcelain  under  the  ring,  in- 
tended to  partially  inclose  the  exposed  end  of  the  root ;  and 
the  other  has  a  partial  floor  made  of  loose  gold  foil  stuited 
behind  the  porcelain,  before  the  solder  was  flowed  through 
the  back  of  the  crown.  It  is  insisted  that  when  the  crown 
is  constructed  in  this  way,  it  does  have  the  inclosed  cap  of 
the  patent,  and  consequently  the  end  of  the  root  is  not  her- 
metically sealed.     The  controversy  as  to  this  patent  is  thus 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  173 

narrowed  down  to  the  question  whether  the  substitution  of  a 
complete  floor  over  the  end  of  the  natural  root,  in  the  place 
of  a  partial  floor,  involves  a  sufficient  invention  to  sustain 
the  patent. 

"  It  is  to  be  observed  that  in  one  sense  the  end  of  the  root 
is  hermetically  sealed  according  to  the  method  of  the  patent, 
whether  covered  with  the  closed  cap  or  not.  The  specifica- 
tion states  that  the  prepared  crown  is  slipped  upon  the  pre- 
pared root  and  cemented  thereto.  As  the  invention  was 
practiced  by  Dr.  Richmond  from  1876,  enough  cement  was 
placed  inside  the  recess  of  the  prepared  crown  to  exude  at 
the  margin  of  the  gum  when  the  crown  was  forced  on  the 
root,  to  fill  up  the  space,  and  to  make  a  solid  contact,  when 
hard,  between  the  root  at  all  the  parts  exposed  and  the  crown 
beneath  and  the  rino;  surrounding  the  root.  The  cement  not 
only  serves  to  hold  the  crown  firmly  in  its  place  upon  the 
root,  but  forms  a  hermetically  sealed  inclosure  of  the  root. 
But  it  is  insisted  by  the  experts  for  the  complainant,  and  by 
some  of  the  witnesses  who  have  applied  the  invention  prac- 
tically, that  unless  the  ring  has  a  solid  metallic  floor,  the 
porcelain,  where  it  joins  the  ring,  cannot  be  so  closely  united 
that  the  juices  of  the  mouth  will  not  enter  at  the  joint ;  that 
the  solder  flowed  in  behind  the  porcelain  will  not  effectually 
close  this  joint ;  and  that  inconsequence  the  cement  inclosing 
the  root  will  soon  be  dissolved  and  destroyed  by  the  secre- 
tions of  the  mouth.  It  is  alleged  that  if  the  minutest  hole 
or  perforation  is  left  in  the  floor  of  the  inclosing  cap,  the 
cement  is  exposed  to  the  secretions ;  that  the  secretions  of 
different  mouths  vary  wonderfully  in  their  destructive  action, 
and  that  while  in  some  cases  the  cement  might  resist  for  years, 
in  others,  it  would  fail  speedily  ;  and  thus  that  the  practical 
value  of  the  invention  depends  most  materially  upon  the 
inclosing  cap. 

"  Inasmuch  as  Dr.  Richmond  had  for  years  been  practi- 
cing the  invention,  without  a  closed  cap, and  introducing  his 
artificial  crown  everywhere  to  the  profession  as  a  perfect  sub- 
stitute when  inserted  upon  a  natural  root  for  the  natural 
tooth,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  mechanical  change  of 


174  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

covering  the  ring  with  a  solid  floor,  thereby  converting  it 
into  a  cap,  was  introduced  by  him  so  much  for  its  utility  as 
it  was  tor  t  lie  purpose  of  suggesting  novelty,  and  enabling  him 

and  those  with  whom  he  had  been  engaged  to  obtain  a  patent. 
The  change  was  not  made  until  others  had  become  pecu- 
niarily interested  with  Dr.  Richmond  in  his  invention.  Then 
it  was  suggested  that  the  reason  of  the  failure  of  several 
crowns  which  had  been  inserted  for  patients,  was  that  they 
were  defective,  because  they  were  open  at  the  end  of  the  cap  in- 
closing the  end  of  the  root  at  the  point  where  the  porcelain 
came  in  contact  with  the  cap.  Thereupon  the  closed  cap  was 
adopted.  Xo  experiments  were  apparently  necessary,  but 
the  defect  was  remedied  as  soon  as  it  was  suggested.  It  is 
testified  that  the  effect  of  this  change  was  greatly  to  increase 
the  strength  of  the  artificial  crown,  and  assist  in  protecting 
the  root  from  the  leverage  of  the  pin  by  lateral  pressure,  as 
well  also  to  protect  more  efficiently  the  cement  from  the  action 
of  the  secretions  of  the  mouth.  On  the  other  hand,  the  tes- 
timony indicates  that  since  the  closed  cap  has  been  adopted, 
it  is  not  exclusively  used  by  those  who  are  authorized  to 
practice  the  invention  under  the  patentees.  And  although 
it  is  perhaps  generally  preferred,  the  impression  left  by  the 
proofs  is,  that  there  is  considerable  exaggeration  in  the 
opinion  that  attributed  to  the  closed  cap  the  peculiar  efficacy 
which  has  been  assigned  to  it. 

"  If  Dr.  Richmond  had  been  the  first  to  make  a  closed  cap 
for  a  use  cognate  to  that  to  which  it  was  applied  by  him,  the 
question  whether  there  was  any  invention  in  making  the 
change  might  be  resolved  in  favor  of  the  complainant.  But 
it  Avas  not  new  in  the  art  to  use  a  closed  cap  in  order  to  her- 
metically inclose  the  root  of  a  tooth.  This  sufficiently  ap- 
pears by  reference  to  a  publication  in  the  '  Missouri  Dental 
Journal,'  in  18G9,  of  the  operation  of  Dr.  Morrison.  That 
publication  describes  an  operation  in  which  a  gold  cap  is 
fitted  upon  the  root  of  a  lost  or  decayed  tooth,  so  as  to  be 
adjusted  accurately  to  the  remaining  portions  of  the  tooth 
and  made  to  correspond,  in  configuration,  with  the  original 
tooth.     The  cap  is  tilled  with    thin   paste   of  cement,  and 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  175 

pressed  to  its  place  upon  the  root,  the  superfluous  cement 
being  crowded  out  at  the  margin  of  the  gum  where  the  cap 
extends  quite  to  the  alveolus.  Another  instance  of  the  use  of 
the  caps  having  a  tight  metal  floor  to  be  inserted  on  the 
natural  roots  of  teeth,  and  having  a  porcelain  tooth-crown  sol- 
dered on  the  cap,  is  disclosed  in  the  patent  granted  February 
3d,  1881 ,  to  John  B.  Beers,  for  an  improvement  in  artificial 
crowns  for  teeth.  In  view  of  these  references  alone,  it  must 
be  held  that  there  was  no  invention  in  making  the  change 
which  was  effected  by  Dr.  Richmond  in  the  fall  of  1881,  by 
substituting  the  closed  cap  in  the  place  of  the  cap  with  a  partial 
floor  or  without  a  solid  floor.  All  that  Richmond  did,  was  to 
close  a  band  or  ferrule  with  a  bottom  of  gold,  and  build  up 
his  artificial  crown  upon  it,  and  the  way  to  do  this  had  been 
already  pointed  out. 

"  The  patent  cannot  be  sustained  upon  the  theory  that 
Dr.  Richmond  was  experimenting  with  and  improving  his 
method  of  making  and  inserting  artificial  tooth-crowns  dur- 
ing the  time  intervening  between  his  operation  in  San  Fran- 
cisco, in  1876,  until  at  last,  with  the  change  to  the  closed  cap 
made  by  him  in  the  fall  of  1881,  he  succeeded  in  perfecting 
an  invention  which  up  to  that  time  had  been  inchoate  or  in- 
complete. During  all  this  period,  he  had  been  demonstrating 
and  practicing  the  invention  in  public  to  dentists  through- 
out the  United  States  and  in  his  private  practice,  with  all 
the  variations  of  mechanical  detail.  Those  to  whom  he 
taught  his  method  for  compensation  bought  their  instruction 
in  order  to  practice  the  invention  in  their  profession ;  they 
did  practice  it,  and  it  was  put  into  successful  use  in  all  parts 
of  the  country  ;  and  it  is  now  too  late  to  deprive  the  public 
of  what  became  rightfully  theirs,  by  supplementing  to  the 
invention  a  mere  matter  of  mechanical  improvement  which 
in  itself  had  no  patentable  novelty. 

"  The  third  patent  in  suit  is  No.  277,933,  granted  May 
22nd,  1883,  to  Alvan  S.  Richmond,  assignor,  etc.,  for  an  arti- 
ficial denture. 

"  It  is  sufficient  to  say  of  this  patent  that,  in  view  of  the 
invention  of  Dr.  C.  M.  Richmond  and  Dr.  Low,  the  first  and 


176  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

third  claims  embrace  nothing  which  involves  invention,  and 
that  carrying  the  metal  of  the  bridge  under  the  wearing  sur- 
face of  the  porcelain  does  not  impart  a  patentable  character 
to  the  third  claim. 

"At  the  hearing  of  the  cause,  we  indicated  sufficiently 
the  reasons  for  considering  the  fourth  patent,  upon  which  the 
suit  was  brought,  invalid  for  want  of  novelty,  and  it  is 
unnecessary  to  enlarge  upon  them  now. 

"  A  decree  is  ordered  for  an  injunction  and  an  account- 
ing as  to  the  first  of  the  patents  in  suit.  As  to  the  others, 
the  bill  is  dismissed.     Neither  party  is  awarded  costs. 

u  E.  X.  Dickerson,  Jr.,  and  E.  N.  Dickerson,  for  the 
plaintiff. 

"John  Iyimberly  Beach  and  S.  J.  Gordon,  for  the  de- 
fendants. 

"  (Endorsed)  United  States  Circuit  Court,  Southern  Dist. 
of  X.  Y.  The  International  Tooth-Crown  Company  v. 
Richmond  et  al. — Opinion,  Wallace,  J.,  U.  S.  Circuit  Court. 
Filed,  February  22nd,  1887.,  Timothy  Griffith,  Clerk." 

The  history  of  this  litigation  shows  that  Dr.  Richmond 
having  sold  his  crown  patent  to  Dr.  Sheffield,  one  of  the  in- 
corporators of  the  International  Tooth-Crown  Company,  and 
taken  a  license  under  it,  was,  in  default  of  payment  of  license 
fees,  sued  as  an  infringer  of  his  own  patent. 

Another  suit  having  been  brought  against  Dr.  Gay  lord, 
of  New  Haven,  for  infringement  of  patents  owned  by  the 
International  Tooth-Crown  Company,  a  consolidation  of  the 
two  cases  was  effected,  and  the  issue  was  tried  on  its  merits, 
to  test  the  validity  of  the  four  patents  named,  with  Dr. 
Gay  lord,  as  the  principal  defendant. 

An  association  of  dentists  was  organized  in  New  York, 
under  the  leadership  of  Dr.  A.  L.  Northrop,  which  assumed 
the  defense  of  the  suit.  The  case  was  argued  before  Judges 
"Wallace  and  Shipman,  with  the  result  as  stated  above. 

An  appeal  was  taken  by  the  Crown  Company  to  the 
Supreme  Court,  as  to  the  two  patents  to  C.  M.  Richmond. 
The  defense  was  conducted  by  the  association  of  New  York 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  177 

dentists  referred  to,  assisted  by  the  counsel  of  the  Dental 
Protective  Association. 

The  Supreme  Court  has  sustained  the  action  of  the 
Circuit  Court  declaring  invalid  the  C.  M.  Richmond  patents, 
2sos.  277,941  and  277,943,  which  are  now  public  property. 
The  Low  patent  and  the  A.  S.  Richmond  patent  had  not  been 
appealed,  and  were  not  before  the  court.  The  former,  there- 
fore, is  in  force,  and  the  latter  remains  invalid  by  the  decree 
of  the  Circuit  Court,  the  decision  in  both  these  cases  being, 
however,  subject  to  revision  by  the  Supreme  Court  on  appeal. 

Artificial  Bridge-Dentures. 

A  bridge-denture  practically  means  the  adaptation  of 
one  or  more  artificial  teeth,  to  replace  the  lost  natural  ones, 
without  the  use  of  a  plate  covering  the  roof  of  the  mouth ; 
the  artificial  teeth  being  connected  to  a  bar  having  its  ter- 
minal supports  upon  the  natural  teeth  or  roots,  by  clasps,  pins 
or  similar  devices  and  intervening  ones,  if  necessary,  upon 
adjacent  teeth,  thereby  securing  it  in  position  permanently 
or  removably. 

The  bridge  principle  was  in  use  over  fifty  years  ago,  and 
even  as  far  back  as  1785,  and  therefore  is  public  property; 
hence  any  dental  practitioner  can  avail  himself  of  the  various 
uses  to  which  the  principle  can  be  adapted,  providing  he 
does  not  infringe  certain  existing  patents.  There  are  two 
methods  recognized  in  bridging  teeth,  viz.  :  removable  and 
permanent.  The  former  are  generally  retained  by  means  of 
clasps  encircling  adjoining  teeth.  This  principle  has  been 
practiced,  as  stated,  for  more  than  fifty  years.  Cases  can  be 
brought  forward  in  substantiation  of  this  fact ;  consequently 
all  forms  of  removable  bridge-work  are  practically  free  (de- 
cided in  International  Tooth-Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond  et  al), 
and  can  be  practiced  without  infringement,  excepting  possi- 
bly the  Throckmorton  patent,  in  which  a  clasp  extends  over 
the  alveolar  border,  or  the  Curtis  Bridge-Denture.  All  other 
improvements  patented  are  such  as  do  not  embrace  the  nov- 


1TV  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

elty  requisite  to  sustain  the  claims  of  invention,  or  the  inven- 
tion lias  been  abandoned  to  the  profession. 

Permanent  bridge-dentures,  it  is  claimed, are  all  infringe- 
ments of  the  Low  patent,  sustained  in  the  case  of  Inter- 
national Tooth-Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond  et  al,  this  patent 
practically  covering  all  forms  of  permanent  bridge-dentures. 
This  claim  is  erroneous.  The  following  forms  can  be  prac- 
ticed without  infringement,  viz.  :  "An  artificial  denture  con- 
sisting of  teeth  fastened  upon  a  metal  backing.  The  extreme 
teeth,  or  those  at  each  end  of  the  artificial  denture  are  pro- 
vided each  with  a  pin.  These  pins  are  to  go  into  holes 
drilled  in  the  prepared  roots  of  natural  teeth,  and  in  this  way 
the  denture  is  to  be  held  in  place  by  means  of  cement.  A 
slight  bearing  is  formed  by  plates  which  are  to  bear  upon 
the  smooth  ends  of  the  natural  roots  remaining  in  the  gum. 
This  denture  consists  of  teeth  held  in  by  pivots  and  connected 
by  a  bar  or  backing  of  metal."  This  method  was  described 
by  W.  II.  II.  Eliot,  in  an  article  published  in  March,  1844, 
in  the  American  Journal  of  Dental  Sciences, and  was  quoted 
in  the  case  of  International  Tooth-Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond. 
Hence  this  form  of  permanent  denture  can  be  practiced  with- 
out fear  of  infringement.  For  a  more  accurate  description, 
it  can  be  said  "  that  to  join  artificial  teeth  together  by  means 
of  a  bar  or  by  metal  backings,  and  having  the  extreme  teeth 
(or  intervening  ones)  provided  with  pins  which  are  inserted 
in  the  canals  and  fastened  by  means  of  cement,'"  is  a  legiti- 
mate form  of  practice,  unprotected  by  patents. 

Again,  a  method  for  which  a  patent  was  issued  to  Ben- 
jamin J.  Bing,  January  23d,  1871,  consists  of  attaching  arti- 
ficial teeth  to  metallic  bars,  which  bars  at  either  end  are 
secured  to  natural  teeth,  by  forming  cavities  in  the  natural 
teeth,  and  then  filling  the  cavities  with  gold  or  other  ma- 
terial. As  this  patent  has  expired,  it  can  be  used  without 
legal  liability.  Combinations  of  the  Eliot  and  Bing 
principles  can  be  formed,  in  which  one  end  of  the  bar  is  an- 
chored in  a  cavity  in  the  natural  tooth,  and  the  other  one 
consists  of  an  artificial  tooth  with  a  pin  which  is  cemented 
in  the  natural  tooth-root,  or  the  intervening  artificial  teeth 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  179 

may  be  provided  with  such  pins.  These  and  similar  com- 
binations may  be  formed  without  fear  of  infringement  of  any 
patents. 

The  claims  granted  in  the  Low  patent  and  sustained  by 
U.  S.  Circuit  Court,  Southern  District,  N.  Y.,  are  entirely 
too  broad,  and  the  claim  of  novelty  is  in  violation  of  evi- 
dence that  can  be  produced,  and  of  the  general  principles  of 
dentistry  and  mechanics. 

The  first  claim  is  as  follows :  "  A  bridge  attached  to  con- 
tinuous bands  cemented  to  adjoining  permanent  teeth  with- 
out dependencies  on  the  gum  beneath."  Upon  the  analysis 
of  this  claim,  it  seems  as  if  it  rests  entirely  upon  the  use  of 
the  cement  to  hold  the  denture  in  place  permanently,  as  there 
is  no  further  novelty  involved,  as  one  acquainted  with  the 
principles  and  practices  of  dentistry  can  demonstrate. 

The  specification  states  that "  artificial  teeth  are  attached 
to  continuous  bands  fitted  and  cemented  to  adjoining  teeth." 
Thus  it  is  shown  that  the  patentee  is  restricted  solely  to  sup- 
porting and  fastening  the  band  permanently  to  the  natural 
tooth.  In  the  claim,  it  is  not  stated  whether  the  band  attach- 
ment can  be  made  to  a  metal  cap-  fastened  on  the  root,  or 
whether  a  metal  crown  or  cap  can  be  substituted  for  the  con- 
tinuous band.  The  patentee's  right  is  specified  in  the  patent 
claims,  and  in  no  wise  is  he  entitled  to  more  than  is  contained 
in  these  claims.  Hence  it  is  but  reasonable  to  suppose  that  a 
natural  root  with  an  artificial  metal  crown  cemented  thereon, 
can  be  used  in  conjunction  with  other  forms  of  artificial 
teeth,  without  infringement  of  the  Low  patent.  However, 
notwithstanding  the  distinct  statement  in  the  claims,  the  le- 
gal decision  in  International  Tooth-Crown  Co.,  as  mentioned 
later,  gives  a  more  liberal  construction  of  them.  In  further 
'•riticism  of  this  patent,  it  may  be  said  that  a  continuous 
band  is  simply  a  clasp  entirely  closed,  an  addition  of  a  half 
•  •ircle. 

This  does  not  involve  invention.  Continuous  bands  have 
been  frequently  used  in  dentistry  previous  to  the  issue  of  the 
Low  patent,  particulary  in  gold  plates,  in  the  regulation  of 
teeth,  and  in  removable  bridge-dentures. 


180  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

In  Bean  v.  Small  wood,  2  Story,  408,  the  court  said,  "  a 
machine,  apparatus  or  other  mechanical  contrivance,  in 
order  to  give  the  party  a  claim  to  a  patent  therefor,  must  in 
itself  be  substantially  new.  If  it  is  old  and  well  known,  and 
applied  to  a  new  purpose,  that  does  not  make  it  patentable." 

The  particular  use  to  which  a  device  may  be  put  has  no 
hearing  upon  the  patentability  of  such  device ;  that  must 
depend  upon  the  essential  novelty  of  its  construction  and 
mode  of  operation. 

Hence  the  use  of  a  continuous  band  by  Low  is  not  new 
in  dentistry,  and  presumably  unpatentable  alone,  as  it  is  only 
adapted  to  a  new  use.  It  has  been  held  in  this  case  that  a 
metal  crown  or  cap  is  but  a  continuous  band  with  a  roof  on  it. 

It  is  as  much  novelty  for  Richmond  to  support  a  bridge 
•on  caps  or  metal  crowns,  as  for  Low  to  use  continuous  bands. 
A  band  is  a  plain,  continuous  strip,  with  its  ends  open.  In 
no  wise  can  a  metal  crown  be  construed  as  a  band  with  simply 
a  cap  on  it.  A  band  must  encircle  the  object  it  bands  closely 
and  be  in  contract  at  every  point,  on  its  inner  side,  with  the 
object  it  encircles,  or  it  cannot  be  called  a  band.  Its  outer 
side  may  take  any  desired  form,  concave,  corrugated,  etc. 
For  example,  a  ring  or  barrel  hoop.  The  ring  closely  clasps 
the  finger,  and  the  hoop  the  barrel — the  outside  may  take  any 
desired  form.  The  primary  requirement  is  that  the  inner 
side  be  in  contact  with  the  object  encircled.  If  one  end  is 
closed,  it  becomes  a  cap,  a  new  device.  When  a  metal  cap  or 
crown  is  inserted  on  a  tooth-root,  but  one  end  encircles  the 
tooth,  at  its  neck,  while  the  other  portion  is  not  in  contact 
with  the  tooth ;  hence,  it  can  in  no  wise  fulfill  the  require- 
ments of  a  band  and  cannot  be  construed  as  such.  The  laws 
of  mechanics  will  uphold  this  reasonable  view. 

The  Bing  and  Elliot  dentures  were  permanently  cemented, 
in  position,  therefore  Low  cannot  claim  novelty  in  fastening 
a  denture  permanently  in  position  by  cementing  the  bridge- 
piece  to  the  adjoining  teeth.  His  right  is  restricted,  as  above 
noted,  alone  to  the  cementing  of  continuous  bands  to  the  ad- 
joining teeth. 

Furthermore,  as  to  the  clause,  "  without  dependencies  on 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  181 

the  gum  beneath,"  in  the  Elliot  and  Bing  principles  of  bridge- 
dentures,  such  dependencies  on  the  gum  beneath  for  support 
were  not  required,  as  the  bridge-denture,  when  in  position, 
was  a  rigid  attachment.  Hence  both  of  these  inventors  had 
done  (Elliot  in  1844,  and  Bing  in  1871)  what  Low  claims,  in 
his  patent  (1878),  was  original  with  him.  In  each  case,  Bing 
and  Elliot  derived  the  support  for  their  especial  form  of 
bridge-denture  from  the  adjoining  teeth. 

The  second  claim  grants  the  inventor  the  right  to  "  an 
artificial  tooth  cut  away  at  the  back,  so  as  not  to  present  any 
contact  with  the  gum,  except  along  its  front  lower  edge.'x 
This  was  the  form  of  artificial  tooth  used  by  some  dentists 
in  constructing  bridge-dentures  many  years  previous  to  the 
date  of  this  patent.  Even  in  certain  classes  of  temporary 
bridge-dentures,  this  principle  was  observed,  because  the  cut- 
ting away  of  the  tooth  in  the  back  caused  it  to  better  adapt 
itself  to  the  gum. 

In  conclusion,  the  novelty  involved  in  the  Low  patent 
right  consists  in  the  combination  of  two  elements  that  have 
been  used  in  dentistry,  for  similar  purposes,  previous  to  the 
date  of  this  patent,  but  not  combined.  Hence  it  was  new  to 
combine  them,  and  the  patent  is  valid  to  that  extent,  viz.  :- 
the  cementing  of  continuous  bands  to  adjoining  teeth.  Should 
a  new  element  be  substituted  for  one  of  those  claimed  in  the 
patent,  the  claim  would  be  broken  without  infringement, 
particularly  if  a  new  result  were  attained.  Thus,  if  a  metal 
cap  or  crown  is  substituted  for  the  continuous  band,  the  pat- 
ent is  avoided,  because  it  cannot  be  denied  that  an  entirely 
new  device  is  used,  and  another  result  obtained.  The  clause, 
in  the  first  claim,  "  without  dependencies  on  the  gum  be- 
neath," has  no  special  signification,  because,  as  has  been 
proven,  both  Elliot  and  Bing  inserted  permanent  bridge- 
dentures  without  such  dependencies. 

The  foregoing  dissertation  and  criticism,  by  the  author, 
of  the  Low  bridge-denture  patent,  and  of  the  litigations  that 
have  ensued  consequent  upon  its  infringement,  is  a  statement 
of  his  opinion  and  belief  as  to  the  actual  novelty  involved  in 
this  method  of  bridging  teeth  ;   of  the  interpretation  of  the. 


182  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

claim  as  granted  in  the  patent  right,  and  of  the  broad  construc- 
tion of  these  claims  given  in  the  decision  in  the  case  of 
International  Tooth-Crown  Co.  v.  Richmond  et  al.  These 
conclusions  and  arguments  arc  stated  merely  as  a  personal 
opinion,  and  as  such  must  be  considered,  as  the  Low  patent 
lias  been  judicially  declared  valid.  The  statement  of  the  le- 
gal interpretation  of  this  decision  is  cited  elsewhere  and  ex- 
pounded below,  in  the  opinion  of  Messrs.  Beach  and  Gordon, 
which  can  be  assumed  to  be  correct. 

A  statement  as  to  the  status  of  the  International  Tooth- 
Crown  Company's  suits,  and  an  interpretation  thereof  made  by 
Messrs.  Gordon  and  Beach,  at  the  request  of  the  First  District 
Dental  Society  of  the  State  of  New  York,  is  as  follows : 

"  These  suits  involved  the  validity  of  the  two  patents  to 
Cassius  M.  Richmond,  Nos.  277,941  and  277,943,  for  '  tooth- 
crowns,'  etc.,  the  patent  to  Alvan  S.  Richmond,  No.  277,933, 
for  'bridge,'  all  dated  May  22nd,  1883,  and  the  patent  to 
James  E.  Low,  for  '  method  of  supporting  artificial  teeth 
by  bands  cemented  to  permanent  teeth,'  No.  238,940,  dated 
March  15th,  1881. 

"  The  first  two  patents  covered  what  is  known  as  the 
'  Richmond  '  and  the  '  Sheffield  '  Tooth-Crowns  in  all  their 
varieties.  They  were  held  invalid,  and,  therefore,  you  are  at 
liberty  to  make  such  tooth-crowns,  without  being  in  any  way 
liable  to  the  International  Tooth-Crown  Company. 

"  The  complainants  have  appealed  this  case  to  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court,  but  we  do  not  advise  you  that  any 
different  decision  will  probably  result.  (Decided.)  The 
practical  result  is  that  the  tooth-crown  is  free. 

"  The  patent  for  the  Richmond  bridge  was  also  held  in- 
valid, but  the  Low  patent  was  declared  to  be  good.  This 
Low  patent  covers  a  bridge  attached  to  continuous  bands 
cemented  to  adjoining  permanent  teeth,  'whereby  said  arti- 
ficial teeth  are  supported  by  said  permanent  teeth,  without 
dependencies  on  the  gum  beneath.' 

"  The  Richmond  patent  is,  as  you  will  remember,  for  a 
bridge  supported  by  caps,  and  the  court  held  that  it  was 
not  invention  for  Richmond  to  support  a  bridge  on  caps,  but 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  183 

it  was  invention  for  Low  to  support  a  bridge  on  bands, 
taking  all  the  surrounding  circumstances  into  consideration, 
and  that,  as  a  cap  was  nothing  but  a  band  with  a  roof  on  it, 
the  Richmond  bridge  infringed  the  Low  patent. 

"  The  practical  effect  of  this  decision,  if  the  complainant 
chooses  to  follow  it  up  diligently,  and  unless  some  new  evi- 
dence is  found,  will  be  to  shut  the  profession  out  from  insert- 
ing permanent  bridges  supported  at  one  or  more  points  by 
cemented  caps  or  bands  without  dependence  on  the  gum.  As 
the  matter  now  stands,  any  dentist  inserting  a  Richmond 
bridge  (according  to  the  decision)  infringes  the  Low  patent, 
and  an  injunction  would  doubtless  now  be  granted  by  any 
Federal  judge,  on  application,  on  the  strength  of  that  adjudi- 
cation alone. 

"  An  appeal  can  be  taken  by  the  defendants  to  the  Supreme 
Court  a  year  or  so  hence,  after  an  accounting  by  them,  and 
determining  the  amount  of  profits  or  damages  the  complain- 
ant is  entitled  to  recover. 

"If  such  proof  can  be  made  strong  and  clear  enough  to 
satisfy  the  court  that  what  Low  described  was  well  known, 
and  had  been  practiced  by  the  dentists  in  the  United  States 
before  Low  claims  to  have  done  it,  the  present  case  may  be 
•opened  for  rehearing  on  the  newly-discovered  evidence,  or 
the  courts  might  refuse  to  grant  injunctions  upon  the  ground 
that  the  present  decision  would  have  been  the  other  way,  if 
this  evidence  had  been  before  it.  At  any  rate,  the  question 
■of  the  validity  of  the  Low  patent  would  be  retired,  if  its 
owner  ever  had  the  temerity  to  sue  a  dentist  who  had  signed 
a  license  in  which  he  covenanted  never  to  deny  its   validity. 

"  Whether  in  a  suit  against  such  a  licensee  the  court 
would  enjoin  upon  the  covenantees,  under  a  patent  declared 
void,  either  before  or  after  taking  of  the  license,  is  question- 
able."— Dental  Cosmos,  December,  1887. 

Mechanical  Operation  Patents. 

Numerous  patents  have  been  issued  for  mechanical  op- 
erations, the  methods  of  constructing  artificial  dentures,  etc. 
The  annexed  patents  quoted  are  only  a  selection  of  a  small 


184  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

number  of:  them,  embracing  and  representing  the  various 
classes  of  patents  issued  for  methods  of  making  artificial  den- 
tures. The  "  Official  Gazette  of  the  United  States  Patent  Of- 
fice "  must  be  consulted  for  a  more  complete  re] tort  of  all  of 
them. 

Patent,  No.  67,129,  granted  to  E.  J.  Merrick,  for  au 
elastic  plate,  which  is  attached  to  the  hard  portions  and  may 
be  renewed  as  the  mouth  changes.  The  claims  are :  First,, 
for  an  elastic  base  plate,  and  second,  for  the  manner  of  making 
the  elastic  base  smooth  on  the  lingual  side,  by  means  of  its- 
being  vulcanized  in  contact  with  polished  metal. 

Patent,  No.  90,765,  to  J.  A.  McClelland,  dated  June  1st, 
1869,  for  a  plate  or  brass  plate  having  an  upturned  margin, 
and  for  making  the  gums  and  attaching  them  to  the  pre- 
pared plate  at  one  and  the  same  operation  of  pressing. 

Patent,  No.  179,508,  granted  July  4th,  1876,  to  M.  Bemis. 

Brief: — A  lower  denture  is  composed  entirely  of  double 
teeth  (molars),  and  is  used  by  placing  the  denture  over  either 
the  stumps  or  the  front  teeth  themselves  when  they  are  short. 

Again,  for  artificial  teeth  in  which  the  plates  are 
formed  to  fit  over  the  remaining  natural  ones,  the  artificial 
teeth  arranged  with  the  longer  side  inward,  and  being  all  or 
only  in  part  molar  teeth. 

ratent,  No.  89,253,  granted  April  20th,  1869,  to  L.  1\ 
Streeter,  for  a  celluloid  base  plate. 

Patent,  No.  19,916,  to  Geo.  Diffenbach,  granted  April 
13th,  1858,  for  making  the  base  of  an  artificial  denture  of  a 
composition  of  matter,  in  which  amber  forms  the  principal 
ingredient. 

Patent,  No.  39,538,  granted  to  J.  A.  McClelland,  April 
11th,  1863,  for  the  combination  in  a  dental  plate,  of  a  skele- 
ton-plate, or  a  plate  woven,  or  of  perforated  metal,  with  a 
base  or  filling  of  vulcanized  India-rubber,  in  order  to  unite 
the  perfect  adaptability  of  rubber  to  the  mouth  with  the 
strength  of  the  metal. 

Patent,  No.  71, 707, granted  to  G.  W.  Cool,  December  3d. 
1867,  for  the  method  of  attaching  a  thin  gold  plate  to  the 
vulcanized  plate,  by  fitting  it  to  the  concave  surface  of  the- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  185 

vulcanite,  and  attaching  by  means  of  the  line  teeth  on  its 
surface,  that  penetrate  the  vulcanite  and  are  clinched. 

Patent,  No.  88,682,  granted  to  H.  Twitchell,  April  6th, 
1861,  for  the  method  of  lining  hard  rubber  plates,  or  plates 
of  other  material,  with  soft  rubber,  either  partially  or  wholly. 

Patent,  No.  391,062,  granted  to  W.  H.  Miller,  October 
16th,  1888,  for  an  artificial  denture,  consisting  of  a  non- 
metallic  denture-plate,  having  side  gums  and  teeth  attached 
thereto,  and  a  porcelain  gum  fused  thereon,  forming  the 
front  of  the  denture,  the  metallic  plate  or  gum  being  secured 
to  the  non-metallic  denture-plate,  and  the  latter  vulcanized 
for  a  denture  having  a  continuous  gum. 

A  patent  was  granted  on  July  7th,  1885,  for  a  dental 
plate,  with  one  or  more  strips  of  absorbent  material  for  hold- 
ing perfumed  or  medicated  substances  in  a  recess  formed  in 
the  palatine  surface  of  the  plate,  and  means  for  securing  said 
strips  with  a  suitable  covering  for  said  strips. 

A  patent  granted  July  28th,  1885,  for  a  denture  com- 
posed of  perforated  metal  plate,  having  a  moulded  or  cast 
interior  surface  to  fit  the  palatine  surface,  combined  with 
teeth  set  on  the  perforated  plate,  and  held  in  place  by  the 
moulded  or  cast  material,  the  metal  plate  forming  the  lingual 
surface  and  also  the  base  of  the  whole  plate. 

A  patent  was  granted  to  J.  J.  Stedman,  September  24th, 
1889,  for  a  method  of  employing  clasps  in  partial  denture. 
The  clasp  has  a  lug,  which  is  vulcanized  in  the  rubber  plate, 
to  secure  the  clasp  thereto. 

Patent,  ]STo.  60,871,  granted  to  N.  T.  Folsom,  January 
1st,  1867,  for  an  atmospheric  dental  plate.  A  slight,  con- 
tinuous ridge  is  formed  on  the  inside  of  the  plate,  to  form  a 
chamber  between  the  plate  and  the  gum,  from  which  the  air 
is  partially  exhausted,  to  retain  the  plate  in  position  by  atmos- 
pheric pressure. 

Patent,  No.  115,951,  granted  to  J.  P.  Gillespie,  June 
13th,  1871,  for  a  dental  plate  provided  with  a  flexible  disk, 
the  said  disk  being  corrugated  on  the  side  next  to  the  plate, 
or  the  plate  under  the  disk  is  corrugated. 

Patent,  No.  118,484,  August  29th,  1871,  granted  to  S.T. 


186  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

Purvine  and  II.  Smith.  The  patent  claim  allows  in  a  dental 
plate,  as  a  connection  between  the  plate  proper  and  tin-  vacu- 
um chamber,  the  bar  or  bars  with  open  spaces. 

Patent,  No.  207,099,  granted  September  3d,  1878,  to 
Basil  Wilkerson,  tor  a  dental  plate  having  an  annular  groove 
of  soft  rubber  around  the  air-chamber. 

A  patent  was  granted  September  1st,  1885,  to  T.  Phil- 
lips, for  a  method  of  imitating  the  gold  filling  in  a  natural 
human  tooth,  with  liquid  prepared  gold,  and  then  baking  or 
firing' the  tooth. 

Patents  for  lining  artificial  dentures  with  foil  were 
granted  to  J.  A.  Daly,  .October  9th,  1888,  and  on  October 
19th,  1888  ;  also  to  E.  T.  Starr. 

Tooth-Crown  Patents. 

Many  tooth-crown  patents  have  become  void,  either  by 
legal  decisions,  expiration  of  the  patent  right,  or  by  abandon- 
ment to  the  profession. 

Again,  many  of  the  inventors  have  not  sought  to  com- 
pel the  payment  of  royalties  for  the  use  of  their  patent,  i.  e., 
the  patent  has  not  been  operated.  The  patents  for  the  Rich- 
mond, Sheffield,  etc.,  crowns  (owned  by  the  International 
Tooth-Crown  Company),  have  been  declared  invalid  by  deci- 
sions in  the  courts. 

In  the  case  of  hollow  crowns  and  shells,  the  Beers  pat- 
ent practically  covers  all  such  classes  of  crowns.  A  perusal  of 
the  claims  granted  in  this  patent  will  attest  that  fact.  The 
patent  was  granted  to  John  B.  Beers,  San  Francisco,  Novem- 
ber 4th,  1872. 

Brief: — A  hollow  metal  crown  of  gold  is  lined  with 

enamel,  and   secured  over  a  screw   inserted  in  the  natural 

tooth. 

Claims -.—First.  A  hollow  metal  tooth-crown  or   shell 

for  the  purpose  above  described. 

Second.  The  hollow  metal  crown  or  shell,  when  filled 

with  porcelain  or  other  substance,  with  and  for  the   purpose 

above  described. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  187 

Third.  A  shell  or  hollow  crown  secured  upon  and  around 
the  projecting  portion  or  neck  of  a  tooth  by  means  of  the 
screw  and  a  suitable  cement,  substantially  as  described. 

The  claims  granted  in  this  patent  right  are  very  broad 
and  explicit,  granting  the  patentees  the  right  to  all  forms 
of  hollow  crowns  or  shells,  whether  a  gold  with  a  porcelain 
lining,  a  plain  metal  or  a  hollow  porcelain  crown.  The 
third  claim  distinctly  states :  a  shell  or  hollow  crown,  etc., 
not  specifying  whether  metallic  or  porcelain  ;  hence  all  hol- 
low crowns  of  whatever  material  they  may  consist,  if  they 
are  "  secured  upon  and  around  the  projecting  portions  or 
neck  of  a  tooth,''  can  be  claimed  under  this  patent  right. 

All  forms  of  hollow  crowns  that  have  been  patented 
since  the  date  of  the  Beers  patent  (November  4th,  1872),  are 
but  such  improvements  as  recmire  a  mere  substitution  of 
material  or  mode  of  construction,  or  more  skill  in  the  mode 
of  making,  with  but  little  novelty  in  the  crown  itself.  Many 
of  these  patents,  if  given  a  test  in  court  upon  such  evidence, 
would  be  invalid. 

In  view  of  the  above  facts,  and  as  the  Beers  patent  has 
expired,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  nearly  all  forms  of  tooth-crowns 
can  be  used  without  fear  of  infringement. 

The  Goodyear  Vulcanite  Patents. 

During  the  existence  of  the  Goodyear  patent  for  vulcan- 
ite rubber,  the  dental  profession  was  involved  in  constant 
litigations,  because  of  its  infringement,  in  adapting  hard  rub- 
ber to  artificial  dentures,  without  a  license  from  the  Vulcan- 
ite Company.  The  suits  instituted  against  dentists  for  the 
infringement  of  this  patent  right  and  the  Cummings'  patent, 
are  too  numerous  to  mention. 

The  amount  of  money  collected  from  dentists  as  royalty 
under  these  patent  rights  was  fabulous.  In  consequence  of 
these  suits  by  the  vulcanite  companies  of  Boston  and  New 
York,  the  dentists  of  Xew  York  and  other  cities  organized 
the  American  Dental  Protective  Association,  to  defend  them- 
selves against  these  unjust  demands. 


lss  dental  jurisprudence. 

The  patent  rights  underwhich  these  suits  were  contested, 

was  the  Nelson  Goodyear  patent,  granted  May  6th,  1855,  for 
the  exclusive  control  of  hard  or  vulcanized  rubber  for  all 
purposes;  and  the  patent  issued  to  John  A.  Cummings,  June 
7th,  1864,  for  the  adaptation  of  hard  rubber  to  dental  pur- 
poses. The  process  covered  by  the  Goodyear  patent,  was  "to 
mix  four  ounces  of  suphur  and  one  pound  of  rubber,  and  sub- 
jecting this  mixture  to  a  heat  of  not  less  than  260°  to  275° 
Fahr.,"  which  forms  the  vulcanite.  The  claim  in  the  Cum- 
mings patent  was  for  "  a  plate  of  hard  rubber  or  vulcanite  or 
its  equivalent,  for  holding  artificial  teeth  or  teeth  and  gums.'" 

These  patents  were  owned  by  the  Goodyear  Vulcanite 
Co.,  of  Boston,  Josiah  Bacon  having  a  controlling  interesl 
therein.  Many  suits  were  instituted  against  dentists  through- 
out the  United  States  for  the  use  of  the  methods  claimed  in 
these  patents,  without  obtaining  a  license  therefor  from  the 
company. 

Among  the  numerous  suits  contested  for  the  infringe- 
ment of  these  patents,  the  following  may  be  mentioned : 

American  Hard  Rubber  Co.,  of  New  York,  r.  J.  R.  Dil- 
lingham, tried  in  the  IT.  S.  Circuit  Court,  of  Boston,  January, 
1864,  before  Judge  Sprague,  to  restrain  defendants  from  mak- 
ing hard  rubber  bases  for  artificial  dentures  by  the  process 
patented  to  the  plaintiffs. 

Bacon  v.  Hill,  Supreme  Court,  Dist.  Columbia.  Motion 
for  a  preliminary  injunction  overruled.  Goodyear  v.  Hills, 
same  court.  Motion  for  a  preliminary  injunction  allowed, 
subject,  however,  to  be  dissolved  on  motion  of  the  defendant, 
upon  reasonable  notice,  and  on  giving  to  the  complainants 
security  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  court,  that  he  will  keep 
and  render  an  account  of  all  plates  for  artificial  teeth,  etc., 
made  of  hard  rubber,  in  pursuance  of  the  invention  described 
in  the  letters  in  the  bill  mentioned. 

Dental  Vulcanite  Co.  v.  Drs.  Smith,  of  Syracuse,  Harris, 
of  Skaneateles,  and  Watson  and  Tripp,  of  Auburn.  Injunc- 
tion to  restrain  defendants  from  using  hard  rubber  denied 
in  every  case,  with  costs. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  189 

H.  B.  Goodyear,  as  administrator,  and  Conrad  Poppen- 
husen  v.  Meyer  Dittenhoefer,  Joseph  Steinert  et  al,  U.  S. 
Circuit  Court,  South.  District,  N".  Y.  In  equity,  Cummings 
r.  Gummey,  Goodyear  Dental  Vulcanite  Co.  v.  Gardiner, 
IS.  Y.  Circuit  Court  and  U.  S.  Supreme  Court. 

Bacon  v.  Wait,  H.  B.  Goodyear  et  al  v.  the  same.  Suit 
for  a  preliminary  injunction  to  restrain  T.  G.  Wait  from  in- 
fringing the  Goodyear  patent.  H.  B.  Goodyear  v.  Berry,  IT.  S. 
Circuit  Court,  South.  District,  Ohio. 

A  new  rubber,  under  the  Simpson  patent,  issued  October 
6th,  1866,  was  advertised,  in  which  the  manufacturer,  A.  R. 
Hale,  agreed  and  guaranteed  to  defend  all  purchasers  of  his 
rubber  in  all  suits,  in  law  or  equity,  brought  against  him 
under  the  Patent  Laws  of  the  United  States,  for  using  the 
same  for  dental  purposes. 

The  Simpson  patent  was  for  the  process  of  mixing  two 
ounces  of  benzoin  with  sixteen  ounces  of  sulphur,  and  to  six- 
teen ounces  of  this  mixture  one  quart  of  linseed  was  added. 
This  mixture  is  then  subjected  to  the  proper  degree  of  heat, 
and  the  result  is  the  vulcanized  compound.  To  make  hard 
rubber,  from  ten  to  twelve  ounces  of  this  compound  is  used, 
in  addition  to  one  pound  of  rubber.  This  is  thoroughly 
mixed  and  ground  between  warm  rolls.  This  mixture  of 
rubber  and  vulcanizing  compound  is  subjected  to  a  heat  of 
320°  Fahr.     The  result  is  the  vulcanite. 

Numerous  dentists  availed  themselves  of  the  opportunity 
of  the  guaranteed  immunity  from  suits,  and  used  the  rubber. 
In  subsequent  suits,  A.  R.  Hale  failed  to  defend  the  pur- 
chasers of  his  rubber,  excepting  the  case  of  Goodyear  v. 
Evans,  in  which  it  was  decided  that  Simpson's  patent  was 
an  infringement  of  the  Goodyear  patent.  The  majority  of 
these  suits  were  contested  under  the  Goodyear  patent  which, 
however,  expired  May  6th,  1872  ;  but  the  Cummings  patent 
was  still  in  force,  and  the  Vulcanite  Company  continued  to 
levy  upon  the  dentists  for  royalties  under  this  patent  right, 
for  the  application  of  hard  rubber  to  dental  purposes.  A  test 
case  of  this  patent  was  instituted  by  the  dentists,  viz.,  Good- 
year Dental  Vulcanite  Company  et  al  V.  Daniel  H.  Smith, 


100  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

r.  S.  < Jirct.  Ct.,  1  >ist.  Mass.,  and  tried  before  J  udge  Shepley, 
May  8th,  1874.  The  patent  was  sustained  and  an  injunction 
ordered.  An  appeal  was  taken  to  the  CJ.  S.  Supreme  Court, 
and,  in  the  final  decision, the  action  of  the  Circuit  Court  de- 
claring the  patent  valid  was  upheld.  The  Cummings  patent 
was  then  in  force,  until  it  expired,  seventeen  years  from  the 
date  of  its  issue. 

E. — UNITED   STATES    PATENT    PRACTICES. 

The  experience  of  the  United  States  Supreme  and  Cir- 
cuit Courts  has  proven  that  many  patents  issued  are  infringe- 
ments upon  others  that  have  been  previously  granted,  but 
until  their  legality  or  invalidity  is  established  by  the  deci- 
sion of  the  courts,  the  claims  that  are  granted  in  the  patent 
must  be  recognized  and  not  infringed. 

For   What  a  Patent  is  Granted. 

A  patent  is  granted  for  any  new  or  useful  art,  machine, 
manufacture  or  composition  of  matter,  or  any  new  or  useful 
improvement  thereof. 

To  entitle  a  person  to  obtain  a  patent,  he  must  prove 
himself  to  be  the  inventor  or  originator  of  that  for  which  he 
seeks  the  protection  of  a  patent.  This  matter  is  laid  down 
in  the  patent  laws  as  follows : 

"A  patent  is  granted  any  person,  alien  or  citizen,  who 
has  invented  or  discovered  any  new  and  useful  art  or  machin- 
ery, manufacture  or  composition  of  matter,  or  any  new  or 
useful  improvement  thereof,  not  known  or  used  by  others  in 
this  country  and  not  patented  or  described  in  any  printed 
publication  in  this  or  any  foreign  country,  before  his  inven- 
tion or  discovery  thereof,  and  not  in  public  use  or  on  sale 
more  than  two  years  prior  to  his  application,  unless  the  same 
is  proven  to  have  been  abandoned — such  person  may,  upon 
payment  of  fees  required  by  law  and  other  due  proceedings 
had,  obtain  a  patent  therefor." — Sec.  4886,  R.  S. 

The  only  presumption  why  patents  have  been  granted 
for  certain  methods  in  operative  dentistry  is  because  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  191 

Commissioners  of  Patents  have  not  access  to  the  data  of  what 
has  already  been  accomplished  in  the  dental  profession,  and 
consequently  grant  the  patent  petitioned  for,  if  no  previously 
issued  patent  interferes,  and  no  one  interposes  an  objection  ; 
or  if  the  patentee  has  not  surrendered  his  right  by  abandon- 
ment of  his  invention  to  the  public,  by  allowing  it  to  be  in 
public  use  or  on  sale  for  more  than  two  years  before  apply- 
ing for  a  patent. 

The  invention,  besides  being  new,  must  be  useful,  i.  e., 
it  must  be  capable  of  being  used,  which  implies  that  it  has 
been  brought  to  that  state  of  perfection  or  completeness,  that, 
if  fully  and  correctly  described  in  the  specifications,  those 
skilled  in  the  art  may,  from  the  information  thus  given, 
without  experiment  or  invention  of  their  own,  be  able  to 
practice  the  invention. 

In  dentistry,  many  diverse  conditions  are  presented  for 
treatment  by  the  dentist.  In  certain  cases,  one  method  of 
operation  would  be  applicable,  while  in  others,  it  must  be  al- 
tered or  improved  or  changed  in  some  of  its  details,  that  it 
may  be  practically  employed.  As  a  case  in  point,  a  tooth- 
crown  may  be  instanced.  It  is  the  experience  of  many  prac- 
titioners and  the  author's  own  observation,  that  certain 
forms  of  tooth-crowns  are  adaptable  to  but  a  limited  class  of 
cases.  The  methods  of  applying  the  crown  must  be  im- 
proved and  altered  before  it  can  be  adapted  to  other  classes 
of  cases. 

This  necessarily  involves  invention  on  the  part  of  the 
dentist.  Hence  it  is  but  reasonable  to  suj>pose  that  the 
patentee  can  claim  but  that  portion  of  his  invention  which 
is  adapted  to  the  limited  class  of  cases,  and  not  that  covered 
by  the  dentist's  invention. 

When  a  patent  is  issued  for  a  method  of  dental  opera- 
tion, in  view  of  the  above  circumstances,  the  specifications 
should  precisely  define  the  class  of  cases  for  which  it  is  applic- 
able. There  is  abundance  of  proof  to  show  that  some  of 
the  claims  granted  in  tooth-crown  and  bridge  patents  are  too 
broad,  and  would  not  be  allowed  if  their  legality  were  ques- 
tioned. 


192  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

The  proof  that  a  claim  is  too  broad,  and  covers  more 
than  the  original  patent  should  allow,  is  a  powerful  defense 
for  infringement  of  a  patent. 

A  claim  serves  to  define  not  only  the  limits,  bul  the  '-lass 

of  the  patented  invention  claimed  by  the  inventor  ;is  his  in- 
clusive patent,  and  great  care  is  requisite  to  frame  it  so  that 
it  covers  the  whole  invention,  hut  not  more  than  really  he- 
longs  to  the  inventor. 

First  Invention. 

It  is  a  settled  principle  of  law  that  whosoever  perfects 
an  invention  first,  is  entitled  to  a  patent,  and  is  the  real  in- 
ventor, although  others  may  have  previously  had  the  idea  and 
made  some  experiments  towards  putting  it  in  practice.  He 
is  the  real  inventor  and  is  entitled  to  the  patent,  who  first 
brought  the  invention  to  a  state  of  perfection  and  made  it 
capable  of  useful  operation.  On  this  point,  in  the  case  of 
Pitts  v.  Hall  (2  Blatchf.,  229),  Judge  Nelson  said  : 

"  Now,  there  is  no  doubt  that  a  person,  to  be  entitled  to 
the  character  of  an  inventor,  within  the  meaning  of  the  Act 
of  Congress,  must  himself  have  conceived  the  idea  embodied 
in  his  improvement.  It  must  be  the  product  of  his  own  mind 
and  genius  and  not  of  another." 

Others  may  have  had  similar  ideas  and  experimented 
upon  them.  However,  the  person  who  first  perfected  the 
idea  and  made  it  capable  of  practical  use,  is  the  inventor, 
and  entitled  to  a  patent. 

This  rule,  says  Henry  Ilawson,  is  not  to  be  understood 
as  meaning  that  as  between  two  independent  inventors,  claim- 
ing the  same  thing,  the  right  necessarily  belongs  to  the  one 
who  may  have  first  reduced  the  invention  to  practice.  On 
the  contrary,  although  a  patentable  invention  within  the 
meaning  of  the  law  is  one  perfected  and  adapted  to  actual 
use,  the  right  of  a  party  who  has  produced  such  an  invention 
is  referred  to  the  time  of  his  conception  of  the  invention, 
provided  he  has  perfected  it  and  adapted  to  actual  use  with 
reasonable  diligence. 

Mere  suggestions,  even  if  they  point  towards  a  result, 
are  not  sufficient  to  entitle  one  making  them  to  be  considered 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  193 

the  inventor.  In  order  that  he  may  claim  the  benefit  of 
what  another  does,  the  suggestion  must  leave  nothing  for  the 
mechanic  to  do,  but  to  work  out  what  has  been  suggested. 

Combinations  may  be  made  of  parts  entirely  new  or  en- 
tirely old,  or  part  new  and  part  old,  but  if  the  parts  when 
brought  together  so  co-act  as  to  produce  a  new  and  beneficial 
result,  the  party  so  bringing  them  together  has  made  an  in- 
vention and  is  entitled,  if  he  make  claim  thereto,  to  a  patent 
therefor.  If  new  elements  are  added  to  an  imperfect  com- 
bination, and  if  by  the  addition  of  such  new  elements,  the 
combination  is  made  perfect  and  operative,  the  person  who 
adds  such  elements  is  entitled  to  claim  the  new  combination. 
(Hall  v.  Johnson,  Commissioners'  Decision  (Marble),  May  2nd, 

1883.) 

What  Constitutes  Invention  ? 

To  constitute  invention  there  must  have  been  more  than 
the  mere  idea  of  obtaining  a  certain  result ;  the  conception 
must  be  substantially  the  means  or  method  involved ;  and 
the  invention  must  be  so  far  clear  and  matured,  that  the  in- 
ventor is  prepared  to  give  explanation  sufficing  to  enable  one 
skilled  in  the  art  to  carry  out  the  invention. 

An  imperfect  and  incomplete  invention,  theoretical  or 
experimental  in  its  scope,  is  unpatentable,  yet  the  discovery 
of  something  new,  by  intellectual  thought  or  experimentation, 
is  the  basis  of  such  right,  which  is  rendered  practical  by  the 
perfection  of  the  invention. 

Although  a  second  inventor  has  perfected  the  same  in- 
vention and  reduced  it  to  a  positive  practical  form,  however 
lie  who  invents  first  will  have  the  prior  right.  But,  if  he 
conceives  an  idea,  and  does  not  use  reasonable  diligence  in 
adapting  or  perfecting  the  invention,  and  another  in  the  mean- 
time conceives  the  idea,  but  also  perfects  the  invention  and 
practically  adapts  it  to  actual  use,  the  latter  is  to  be  con- 
sidered the  first  and  original  inventor,  and  a  patent  granted 
to  the  former  will  be  void,  as  he  is  not  the  first  and  original 
inventor.  (Reed  v.  Cutter,  1  Story,  599  ;  Agawam  Co.  v.  Jor- 
dan, 7  Wallace,  583  ;  Cox  v.  Griggs,  2  Fisher,  174;  Ransom 
<.  Mayor,  1  Fisher,  252;  II.  &  C.  Ilowson,  on  Patents, 26.) 


1114  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

By  perfecting  an  invention,  the  law  moans  not  that  the 
inventor  has  so  far  perfected  his  invention  that  there  could 
not  he  any  subsequent  improvement,  hut  that  it  is  so  far  com- 
plete as  to  he  of  practical  utility.  The  possession  of  a  pat- 
ent is  no  evidence  that  the  holder  thereof  is  therehy  entitled, 
legally,  to  the  benefits  of  the  law.  If  rebuttal  evidence  can 
he  given  to  prove  that  the  thing  shown  and  described  in  the 
patent  is  impractical,  or  that  before  the  invention  or  discov- 
ery of  it  by  the  patentee,  it  was  known  or  used  by  others  in 
this  country,  or  patented  or  published  here  or  abroad,  as  it  i- 
especially  specified  in  Sec.  4920,  R.  S.,  that  the  defense  may 
he  made  to  an  action  for  infringement,  that  the  patentee  was 
not  the  original  and  first  inventor  or  discoverer  of  any  sub- 
stantial and  material  part  of  the  thing  patented;  and  to  dis- 
prove the  assumption  that  a  patentee  was  the  first  to  produce 
and  confer  upon  the  public  the  benefit  of  some  new  and  use- 
ful thing  described  and  claimed  in  his  patent,  it  must  appear 
that  prior  to  his  invention  or  discovery,  knowledge  of  the 
same  or  substantially  the  same  thing  existed  among  other 
members  of  the  public. 

The  design  of  the  patent  laws  is  to  reward  those  who 
make  some  substantial  discovery  or  invention,  which  adds 
to  our  knowledge  and  makes  a  step  in  advance  in  the  useful 
arts.  It  was  never  their  object  to  grant  a  patent  for  every 
trifling  device,  every  shade  of  an  idea,  which  would  natural ly 
and  spontaneously  occur  to  any  skilled  mechanic  in  the  ordi- 
nary progress  of  manufactures.  (Supreme  Court,  March  5th, 
1883.  Bradley.  The  Atlantic  Works  v.  Brady ;  National 
Manufacturing  Co.,  et  al  v.  Meyers,  Southern  District,  Ohio, 
U.  S.  Circuit  Court.) 

The  substitution  of  material  does  not  involve  invention. 
Invention  is  an  essential  prerequisite  to  a  patent ;  while  it  is 
not  always  easy  to  distinguish  the  exact  point  where  the  ordi- 
nary mechanical  skill  gives  place  to  invention,  yet  there  are  a 
multitude  of  devices  and  articles  of  manufacture  so  far  re- 
moved from  this  doubtful  point  as  to  leave  the  mind  in  no 
uncertainty  as  to  whether  the  inventive  faculty  has  been 
exercised  or  not.     One  may  often  say  positively  that  there 


DENIAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  195 

is  no  invention,  even  though  nothing  like  the  thing  in  ques- 
tion, in  its  entirety,  was  ever  before  made.  Novelty,  in  this 
sense,  does  not  necessarily  presuppose  invention,  where  in 
a  tooth-crown,  or  other  device,  one  well-known  material  is 
substituted  for  another  in  its  construction,  and  it  is  adapted 
by  a  well-known  process  and  attached  by  another  well-known 
method  in  common  use.  The  inventor  would  produce  sub- 
stantially no  improvement  except  that  resulting  from  the 
mere  substitution  of  material  and  devices,  which  is  not  pat- 
entable. The  law  certainly  never  contemplated  giving  a 
separate  patent  upon  every  possible  form  or  use  to  which 
tooth-crowns  could  be  adapted. 

The  one  first  to  invent  a  new  and  useful  device  is  en- 
titled to  the  protection  of  a  patent,  even  if  its  production 
was  accidental,  and  not  appreciated  at  the  time.  (Garrett  v. 
Siebert.     Interference  decided  October  21st,  1872.) 

In  accordance  with  the  principle  of  the  law  which  re- 
quires of  the  inventor,  in  the  interest  of  the  public,  reason- 
able diligence,  not  only  in  perfecting,  but  in  publishing  his 
invention,  it  is  provided  that  all  applications  for  patents 
shall  be  completed  and  prepared  for  examination  within  two 
years  after  the  filing  of  the  application ;  and  in  default 
thereof,  or  upon  failure  of  the  applicant  to  prosecute  the 
same  within  two  years  after  any  action  therein,  of  which 
notice  shall  have  been  given  to  applicant,  they  shall  be  re- 
garded as  abandoned  to  the  parties  thereto,  unless  it  be 
shown  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Commissioner  that  such 
delay  was  unavoidable. — Sec.  4894,  R.  S. 

In  connection  with  this  section,  should  be  considered  the 
proviso  of  sec.  35,  Act  of  July  8th,  1870,  "that  when  an 
application  for  a  patent  has  been  rejected  or  withdrawn 
prior  to  the  passage  of  this  Act,  the  applicant  shall  have  six 
months  from  the  date  of  such  passage  to  renew  his  applica- 
tion or  file  a  new  one,  and  if  he  omits  to  do  either,  his  appli- 
cation shall  have  been  held  to  be  abandoned,  and  upon  the 
hearing  of  such  application,  abandonment  shall  be  considered 
n-  a  question  of  fact." 

If  a  rejected  and  abandoned  application  is  not  evidence 


196  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

of  a  prior  and  abandoned  invention,  as  against  another  party, 
it  cannot  be  so  as  against  tbe  applicant  himself,  unless  the 
statute  by  express  word  makes  it  90.  But  the  word  "  aban- 
donment" in  the  section  in  question  is  used  in  connection 
only  with  the  word  "application,"  and  the  sections  being  in 
the  nature  of  penal  statutes,  are  to  be  strictly  construed.  In 
accordance  with  this  reasoning,  sec.  4894,  R.  S.,  is  to  be  un- 
derstood as  meaning  that  failure  to  complete  an  application 
-or  to  prosecute  it  after  rejection,  within  two  years,  will  work 
an  abandonment  of  tit  at  application,  while  under  sec.  35,  all 
applications  rejected  or  withdrawn  prior  to  July  8th,  1870, 
and  not  renewed  within  six  months,  are  abandoned.  In  any 
of  such  cases,  a  new  application  may  be  filed  at  any  time,  but 
it  will  not  be  treated  as  a  continuation  of  the  old  application  ; 
that,  having  been  abandoned,  is  a  nullity,  and  has  no  more 
relation  to  or  bearing  upon  the  new  application  of  the  same 
party  or  the  patent  that  may  be  granted  thereon,  than  it 
would  have  upon  the  application  or  patent  of  an  independent 
inventor. 

Infringement. 

An  infringement  of  a  patent  is  the  making,  using  or 
vending  of  a  patented  article  without  the  patentee's  express 
or  implied  consent.  "  The  unauthorized  use  of  a  patented 
invention  is  an  infringement,  no  matter  what  else  the  user 
may  add  to  it "  (Johnson  v.  Root,  1  Fisher,  351 ;  Buerk  v. 
Valentine,  2  0.  G.,  295),  even  though  the  object  or  result  to 
be  secured  is  thereby  better  accomplished  (Imlay  v.  Norwich 
and  Worcester  R.  R.  Co.,  1  Fisher,  340).  And  a  device 
which  performs  all  the  functions  of  one  that  is  patented,  sub- 
stantially in  the  same  way  and  by  substantially  the  same 
means,  is  none  the  less  an  equivalent  to  those  described  in 
the  patent,  because  it  performs  some  of  those  functions  better 
or  performs  others  in  addition.  (Wheeler  v.  Clifford  Mower 
and  Reaper  Co.,  2  0.  G.,  442).  "  The  patentee  of  an  improve- 
ment upon  a  patented  invention  cannot  take  possession  of  the 
latter;  he  must  obtain  the  license  of  the  prior  patentee  to 
use  his  improvement,  or  await  the  expiration  of  the  elder  pat- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  197 

ent,"  (Colt  v.  Moss  Arms  Co.,  1  Fisher,  108 ;  Ilowson,  on  U.  S. 
Patents,  128). 

The  addition  of  certain  elements  to  a  patented  construc- 
tion, which  does  not  unfit  it  from  performing  its  original 
result,  but  simply  adds  the  result  due  to  the  new  elements, 
does  not  avoid  infringement. 

A  mere  change  of  material,  or  of  a  form,  or  structure  of 
a  device,  are  not  patentable.  That  is,  such  changes  as  are 
not  attended  with  any  new  or  improved  results,  or  do  not 
involve  a  new  mode  of  operation.  The  change  may  be  an 
improvement  in  one  sense  of  the  word — in  the  sense  that  a 
mere  substitution  of  metal  for  wood  may  be,  i.  e.,  in  excel- 
lence of  construction — -but  there  must  be  something  more  in 
order  to  constitute  patentable  invention. 

It  is  not  necessary  that  two  devices  be  exactly  similar 
to  constitute  infringement.  If  they  have  the  same  mode  of 
operation,  and  if  they  effect  substantially  the  same  result  in 
substantially  the  same  manner,  one  will  be  an  anticipation  of 
an  infringement  of  a  patent  for  the  other,  according  as  it 
is  later  or  earlier  in  construction.  It  matters  not,  if  one 
gives  a  more  perfect  result  than  the  other,  if  the  same  means 
and  mode  of  operation  are  employed. 

When  in  a  suit  for  infringement  it  is  set  up  as  a  defense, 
that  complainant  derived  his  idea  of  the  patented  invention 
from  some  third  party,  who  first  conceived  it,  the  burden  of 
proof  is  on  the  defendant,  and  a  doubt  respecting  the  evidence 
is  fatal  to  the  defense.  (Duffy  v.  Reynolds  et  al,  Circt.  Ct. 
X.  J.,  Xovember  3d,  1885.) 

"When  from  the  evidence  it  appears  that  the  defendant 
La  simply  pursuing  the  same  process  of  manufacturing,  which 
he  followed  before  the  patent  in  question  was  issued,  the 
court  Avill  not  restrain  him  from  continuing  to  use  the  same 
means.  (Dorian  v.  Gine,U.  S.  Circt.  Ct.,  Eastern  Dist.  Penna., 
IT.  S.  Pat.  Repts.,  February  9th,  1886,  702.) 

The  employment  of  mechanical  advice  to  construct  a 
device  in  accordance  with  ideas  furnished  by  another,  gives 
no  right  to  the  invention.  The  entire  merit  is  in  him  whose- 
inventive  susrgestiveness  conceived  the  invention. 


108  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

The  use  or  knowledge  of  the  use  of  an  invention  in  a 
foreign  country  by  a  person  residing  in  this  country  (U.  S.  A.), 
will  not  defeat  a  patent  which  has  been  granted  to  a  hona 
fide  patentee,  who  at  the  time  was  ignorant  of  the  invention 
or  of  its  use  abroad.  (Doyle  v.  Bpaulding  et  al,  Illingsworth 
v.  same,  U.  S.  Circuit  Ct.,  District  N.  J.,  Patent  Repts.,  April 
15th,  1884,  p.  300.) 

Where  it  is  shown  that  the  patentee's  title  is  clear  be- 
yond, reasonable  doubt,  and  infringement  is  admitted  or 
evident,  the  courts  in  equity  may  grant  a  preliminary  in- 
junction upon  motion,  after  the  filing  of  the  bill  of  complaint 
and  reasonable  notice  given  of  the  application  to  defendant. 

Where  all  the  parts  claimed,  with  one  exception,  were 
old  and  had  been  used  in  a  similar  combination  in  other 
things  of  the  same  general  character,  the  defendant,  not 
using  the  excepted  part,  escapes  infringement.  (Brag  et  al 
v.  Fitch,  et  d,  Supreme  Ct.  U.  S.  A.,  Official  Pat.  Rep.  Ga- 
zette, May  2nd,  1871,  829.) 

The  application  of  an  old  process  or  device  to  a  similar 
or  analagous  subject  with  no  change  in  the  manner  of  ap- 
plying it,  and  no  result  substantially  distinct  in  its  nature, 
will  not  sustain  a  patent,  even  if  the  new  form  of  result  has 
not  before  been  contemplated.  (Penna.  R.  R.  Co.  v.  The 
Locomotive  Engine  Safety  Truck  Co.,  Supreme  Ct.,  U.  S. 
Com.  Repts.,  April  8th,  1884,  p.  206.) 

When  a  patent  in  suit  is  the  first  in  its  particular  field 
of  invention,  its  claim  is  infringed  by  a  combination  which 
employs  well-known  mechanical  equivalents  to  accomplish 
the  results  which  follow  from  the  combination  claimed  in  the 
patent.  (Tarrant  v.  Duluth  Lumber  Co.,  U.  S.  Dist.  Ct.  Min- 
nesota, U.  S.  Pat.  Repts.,  June  21st,  1887,  p.  1425.) 

In  the  case  of  Tarr  et  al  v.  Webb  (U.  S.  Circt.  Ct., 
East  Dis.,  N.  Y.,  July  20th,  1872),  it  was  decided  that  "a 
monopoly  of  the  use  of  a  well-known  substance  in  a  partic- 
ular, but  well-known  form,  cannot  be  secured." 

Patents  are  infringed  by  the  substitution  of  chemical  as 
well  as  mechanical  equivalents,  even  if,  in  some  respects,  they 
are  an  improvement  upon    the   original   processes   patented. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  199 

(Woodward  v.  Morrison  et  al  in  equity,  U.  S.  Circt.  Ct., 
Dist.  Mass.,  March,  22nd,  1872.) 

Where  there  is  a  different  mode  of  operation  produced 
and  an  improved  result  accomplished  by  the  substitution  of 
one  old  device  for  another,  a  patent  may  be  granted. 

And  where  the  construction  of  a  device  is  different 
from  that  of  preceding  ones,  and  better  results  are  obtained, 
its  novelty  and  utility  is  established. 

Adions-at-Law  for  Infringement. 

Remedy  for  infringement  may  be  obtained  by  two  legal 
modes  of  procedure,  viz. :  action-at-law  or  suit  in  equity. 

All  such  actions,  suits  and  controversies  arising  under 
the  Patent  Laws  of  the  United  States  ma}r  be  contested  in 
the  Circuit  Court  of  the  United  States  or  any  District  Court 
having  the  power  or  jurisdiction  of  a  Circuit  Court,  or  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  or  of  any  terri- 
tory. 

The  court  to  be  resorted  to  in  bringing  an  action  for  in- 
fringement, must  be  that  of  a  district  in  which  the  plaintiff 
interested  in  the  patent  and  the  alleged  infringer  reside. 

Sec.  4919,  E.  S.,  serves  to  define  the  question  as  to  who 
can  sue  for  infringement,  as  follows  :  "Action  on  the  case  for 
damages  must  be  in  the  name  of  the  party  interested,  either 
as  patentee,  assignee,  or  grantee,"  i.  e.,  the  suit  is  brought  by 
the  person  having  the  legal  title  to  the  patent  within  the 
judicial  district  in  which  the  suit  is  brought,  at  the  time  the 
infringement  may  have  been  committed.  (Moore  v.  Marsh, 
7  Wallace,  515.) 

The  damages  recoverable  for  infringement  of  a  patent  is 
laid  down  in  Sec.  4919,  R.  S.,  of  the  Patent  Laws  of  U.  S.  A., 
as  follows:  "Damages  for  infringement  of  any  patent  may 
be  recovered  by  action  on  the  case,  in  the  name  of  the  party 
interested,  either  as  patentee,  assignee,  or  grantee.  And 
whenever  in  any  such  action  a  verdict  is  rendered  for  the 
plaintiff,  the  court  may  enter  judgment  thereon  for  any  sum 
above  the  amount  by  the  verdict,  as  the  actual  damages  sus- 
tained, according  to  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  not  ex- 


200  DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 

ceeding  three  times  the  amount  of  such  verdict,  together 
with  the  costs." 

The  verdict  for  damages,  no  matter  how  large,  is  not  a 
complete  remedy  for  past  infringements,  unless  accompanied 
by  a  restraint  in  the  future.  As  it  is  not  within  the  power 
of  a  court  of  law  to  issue  an  injunction,  such  remedy  must 
be  obtained  in  a  court  of  equity.  This  is  provided  for  in  the- 
patent  laws,  that  any  one  of  the  courts  above  named  "  shall 
have  the  power  (upon  bill  in  equity  by  any  party  aggrieved) 
to  grant  injunctions  according  to  the  course  and  principles 
of  courts  of  equity,  to  prevent  the  violation  of  any  right  se- 
cured by  patent,  on  such  terms  as  the  court  may  deem  rea- 
sonable."—Sec.  4921,  R.  S. 

In  the  Act  of  1870,  it  is  provided  that  upon  decree  being 
rendered  in  any  such  case  in  equity  for  an  infringement,  the 
plaintiff  shall  be  entitled  to  recover,  in  addition  to  the  profits 
to  be  accounted  for  by  the  defendant,  the  damages  the  com- 
plainant has  sustained  thereby,  and  the  court  shall  assess  the 
same,  or  cause  the  same  to  be  assessed  under  its  direction ; 
and  the  court  shall  have  the  same  powers  to  increase  the 
damages  found  by  verdicts  in  actions  upon  the  case. — Sec. 
4921,  R.  S. 

The  damages  recovered  in  a  suit  for  infringement  are 
merely  a  satisfaction  for  prior  use  and  do  not  free  the  party 
infringing  from  the  operation  of  a  patent. 

The  use  of  an  invention  covered  by  a  patent  may  consti- 
tute an  infringement,  and  a  party  so  using  an  invention  after 
an  injunction  granted,  will  be  adjudged  guilty  of  contempt. 
(Matthews  v.  Spangenberg,  U.  S.  Circuit  Court,  Southern 
District,  N.  Y.  ;  U.  S.  Pat,  Rep.,  April  24th,  1883,  1,624.) 

In  an  action  for  infringement,  the  defendant  may  plead 
the  general  issue,  and  show  that  he  has  not  infringed  the  pat- 
ent, either  by  showing  that  the  thing  made,  used  or  sold  by 
him,  and  claimed  to  be  similar  to  that  covered  by  a  patent,  is 
not  so  in  fact,  or  that  he  had  a  license  under  the  patent,  from 
the  plaintiff,  or  that  the  plaintiff  has  no  good  title,  or  that 
the  patent  is  void  because  of  an  ambiguous  or  unintelligent 
specification,  or  that  the  invention,  admitting  its  novelty,  is 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  201 

not  a  patentable  subject.     (H.  and  C.  Howson,  on  U.  S.  Pat- 
ents, 135.) 

Under  the  general  issue,  the  defendant  may  have  recourse 
to  other  defenses,  but  not  without  notice  in  writing  to  the 
plaintiff  or  his  attorney,  giving  thirty  days  before  trial. — Sec. 
4920,  R.  S. 

The  defenses  alluded  to  in  the  notice  are  as  follows: 

First.  That  for  the  purpose  of  deceiving  the  public,  the  de- 
scription and  specification  filed  by  the  patentee  in  the  Patent 
Office  was  made  to  contain  less  than  the  whole  truth  relative 
to  his  invention  or  discovery,  or  more  than  is  necessary  to  pro- 
duce the  desired  effect. 

Second.  That  he  had  surreptitiously  or  unjustly  obtained 
the  patent  for  that  which  was  in  fact  invented  by  another,  who 
was  using  reasonable  diligence  in  adapting  and  perfecting  the 
same. 

Third.  That  it  had  been  patented  or  described  in  some 
printed  publication  prior  to  his  supposed  invention  or  dis- 
covery thereof. 

.Fourth.  That  he  was  not  the  original  and  first  inventor  or 
discoverer  of  any  material  and  substantial  part  of  the  thing 
patented. 

Fifth.  That  it  had  been  in  public  use  or  on  sale  in  this 
country  for  more  than  two  years  before  his  application  for  a 
patent,  or  had  been  abandoned  to  the  public. 

Notice  of  the  second,  third  or  fourth  of  these  special 
defenses  must  state  the  names  of  patentees  and  the  dates  of 
their  patents,  and,  when  granted,  the  names  and  residences 
of  persons  alleged  to  have  invented  or  to  have  had  prior 
knowledge  of  the  thing  patented,  and  where  and  by  whom 
it  had  been  used. — H.  and  C.  Howson,  p.  136. 

F. — DENTAL    PROTECTIVE    ASSOCIATION    OF     THE    UNITED   STATES 

OF   AMERICA. 

The  dentists  in  the  United  States  have  an  Association, 
termed  the  "  Dental  Protective  Association  of  the  United 
States,"  to  protect  themselves  from  the  unjust  demands  of  in- 
ventors, and  to  contest,  in  a  lawful  manner,  the  validity  of 


202  DENTAL     JUEISPRUDBNCB. 

certain  patents  owned  by  various  companies  and  individuals, 
when  such  validity  has  not  been  established. 

In  Milwaukee.  Bix  suits  were  pending  for  infringe- 
ment of  the  Low  bridge  patent,  owned  by  the  International 
Tooth-Crown  Co.  These  suits  were  discontinued  by  the  plain- 
t  ill's.  Similar  suits  have  been  brought  against  dentists  in  Bal- 
timore. New  York  State,  Connecticut,  New  Jersey,  etc.  A 
number  of  them  were  decided  in  favor  of  the  plaintiffs,  the 
defendants  being  ordered  to  render  an  accounting  and  pay 
costs. 

Many  of  these  cases  were  contested  in  behalf  of  the  de- 
fendants by  the  Protective  Association.  It  is  not  the  purpose 
to  laud  this  Association,  but  it  certainly  is  deserving  of  credit 
for  its  worthy  object  in  protecting  dentists  from  pecuniary 
extortion. 

In  reference  to  this  Association,  one  important  legal  propo- 
sition remains  a  question  of  doubt  for  interpretation,  viz.  : 
"  Whether  or  not  any  dentist  in  the  United  States,  who  has 
taken  a  license  from  the  International  Tooth-Crown  Co.,  un- 
der their  various  letters  patent,  and  signed  certain  written 
covenants  and  conditions  contained  in  such  licenses,  is  at 
liberty,  after  the  expiration  of  such  license,  to  contest  either 
the  scope  or  validity  of  any  of  the  International  Tooth-Crown 
Company's  patents  recited  in  that  license,  or  deny  that  the 
bridge-work  made  or  put  in  by  such  individual  dentist  in- 
fringes such  letters  patent,  granted  James  E.  Low,  dated 
March  18th,  1881,  No.  238,940?" 

This  question  is  doubtful,  as  no  legal  decisions  have  been 
rendered  in  dental  cases  of  this  nature  ;  however,  the  follow- 
ing favorable  decision  on  this  point  may  be  quoted : 

In  White  et  al  y.Lee  (U.  S.  Circuit  Court,  District  Mass., 
U.  S.  Pat.  Reps.,  April  24th,  1883,  1623),  it  was  decided  that 
a  "  licensee  is  at  liberty  to  contest  the  question  whether  the 
articles  made  by  him  embody  the  invention  or  any  material 
part  of  it,  and  a  stipulation  to  the  contrary  in  the  contract  is 
of  no  effect." 

Again,  in  a  suit  by  a  patentee  against  a  licensee  for 
license-fees  for  the  use  of  a  patented  improvement,  something 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  203 

corresponding  to  an  eviction  of  the  licensee  must  be  pleaded 
and  proven,  if  he  would  defend  against  an  action  for  royal- 
ties. Judge  Lowell,  in  his  opinion,  said :  "  One  of  the  de- 
fendant's agreements  was,  that  he  will  not,  in  any  way,  con- 
test the  validity  of  said  patents,  or  either  of  them,  or  any 
reissue  or  renewal  thereof,  nor  the  sufficiency  of  the  specifi- 
cations or  the  validity  of  the  licensor's  title,  nor  the  fact  of 
his  infringement  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  said  shoes. 
One  of  the  mutual  stipulations  was  that  in  case  of  the  reissue 
of  said  patent,  the  grant  herein  shall  be  good  under  said  is- 
sue, and  the  foregoing  stipulations  and  agreements  on  the 
part  of  the  respective  parties  shall  be  binding  upon  them  in 
the  same  manner  and  to  the  same  extent  as  though  such  re- 
issue had  never  been  obtained."  He  further  said,  "I  inti- 
mated on  a  former  occasion  that  the  stipulation  not  to  contest 
the  fact  of  infringement  was  insensible  and  repugnant,  inas- 
much as  the  agreement  is  only  to  pay  for  such  shoes  as  em- 
body the  invention,  or  some  material  part  thereof,  and  both 
counsel  agree  that  the  cmestion  of  infringement  or  what  would 
be  infringement  in  a  patent  case  is  open."  The  question  has 
been  argued  whether  the  defendant  can  resist  an  action  for 
license-fees  under  a  contract,  by  proving  that  the  patent  is 
void.  In  his  very  thorough  brief,  the  defendant  cites  all  the 
important  cases ;  and  they,  in  a  cursory  examination,  seem 
to  present  a  difference  of  opinion,  which,  on  a  more  careful 
study,  will  be  found  to  disappear.  Many  of  the  decisions 
treat  a  licensor  as  a  landlord  and  a  licensee  as  his  tenant,  who 
cannot  dispute  the  title  so  long  as  he  has  occupancy  of  the 
premises.  Many  of  the  cases,  such  as  Bowman  v.  Taylor,  2 
Adol.  &  E.,  278  ;  Smith  v.  Scott,  6  C.  B.,  K".  S.,  771 ;  Wilder 
v.  Adams,  2  Wood  &  M.,  329,  are  actions-at-law,  and  turn 
upon  the  effect  of  a  recital  or  covenant  in  a  sealed  instrument. 
The  agreement  in  this  case  is  not  under  seal,  and  this  is  not 
an  action-at-law.  Other  cases  state  the  general  doctrine  in  a 
somewhat  absolute  and  general  way,  hardly  admitting  excep- 
tions. (Crossley  v.  Dixon,  10  H.  L.  Cas.,  293 ;  Clark  v. 
Adie,  2  App.  Cas.,  423.)  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  cases 
in  the  United  States,  which  seem  to  hold  that  the  invalidity 


204  DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE. 

of  the  patent  may  always  be  proven,  such  as  Harlow  v.  Put- 
nam, 124  Mass.,  553.  But  these  were  cases  on  either  side, 
which  required  no  nice  distinctions.  The  law  is,  I  thinkr 
that  a  plea  or  answer  that  a  patent  is  void,  is  not  of  itself  a 
sufficient  defense,  but  that  evidence  of  what  may  be  called 
an  eviction  in  such  a  defense.  The  difficulty  is  to  ascertain 
what  amounts  to  an  eviction  in  a  patent  case.  It  is  easilv 
discovered  whether  a  tenant  of  a  certain  parcel  of  land  has 
or  has  not  been  evicted,  but  if  a  patent  is  void,  still  the  li- 
cense may  have  all  the  benefit  of  a  valid  patent,  because  his 
exclusive  title  may  never  have  been  disputed.  In  Lawes  v. 
Purser,  6  El.  &  Bl.,  930,  932,  the  counsel  for  the  plaintiff  ad- 
mitted that  if  every  one  had  publicly  used  the  patented  in- 
vention, that  might  be  equivalent  to  an  eviction,  but  con- 
tended that  a  simple  plea  that  the  patent  was  void,  might 
mean  merely  that  the  pleader,  when  he  began  to  draw  his 
plea,  had  discovered  a  technical  flaw  which  no  one  else  had 
thought  of,  and  the  judgment  pursued  this  exact  line  of  rea- 
soning. In  a  case,  in  Massachusetts,  the  defendants,  who 
were  licensees  and  had  used  the  patent  to  keep  off  competi- 
tion, were  said  by  Judge  Thomas  to  have  had  all  the  benefits 
of  a  valid  patent,  (Bartlett  v.  Holbrook,  1  Gray,  114).  In 
New  York,  in  a  case  which  was  twice  brought  before  the 
Court  of  Appeals,  it  was  held,  first,  that  mere  invalidity  of 
the  patent  was  not  a  defense,  and  second,  that  a  repeal  of  a 
patent  was  a  defense  (Marston  v.  Swett,  66  N.  Y.,  206  ;  R.  C. 
K.  Y.,  562).  These  cases  point  to  the  true  distinction,  how- 
ever difficult  its  application  may  sometimes  be,  that  some- 
thing corresponding  to  eviction  must  be  proven,  if  a  licensee 
would  defend  against  an  action  for  royalties. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  205 

APPENDIX. 

DENTAL    LEGISLATION. 


HISTORY    OF    DENTAL    LEGISLATION. 

Dentistry,  until  within  recent  years,  was  not  accorded 
the  recognition  of  a  scientific  profession;  for  a  long  time  it 
was  practiced  by  persons  engaged  in  other  pursuits,  as  a 
superadded  means  of  livelihood.  Barbers,  blacksmiths,  watch- 
makers, and  others  of  the  same  class,  who  had  no  professional 
education  or  qualifications  whatever,  performed  the  one  oper- 
ation, tooth  extraction,  which  constituted  the  surgical  den- 
tistry in  those  days,  with  nearly  the  same  success  as  the 
regular  practitioner.  In  explanation,  it  may  be  stated  that 
the  accepted  theory  of  the  people  then  was,  that  a  tooth 
should  be  extracted  as  soon  as  it  ached  or  was  attacked  by 
caries ;  and  as  the  operation  had  no  attractions  for  the 
medical  men,  it  was  relegated  to  the  charlatans,  who,  in 
order  to  gain  a  surgical  status,  did  not  hesitate  to  claim  that 
their  specialty  entitled  those  performing  these  operations  to 
the  designation  of  suRGEON-dentists,  which  title  has  ever  since 
been  applied  without  discrimination  alike  to  qualified  and 
unqualified  practitioners  of  dentistry. 

An  Act  entitled,  "For  Barbers  and  Surgeons,"  passed 
in  the  thirty-second  year  of  Henry  VIII,  is  the  first  statu- 
tory law  pertaining  to  the  practice  of  dentistry  enacted  in 
England.  By  the  third  section  of  this  Act,  any  one  who 
"  uses  barbery  or  shaving"  in  the  city  of  London,  its  suburbs, 
and  within  a  circuit  of  one  mile,  is  forbidden  "occupying 
any  surgery,  letting  of  blood,  or  any  other  thing  belonging 
to  surgery,  drawing  of  teeth  only  excepted." 

In  1840,  the  regular  practitioners  endeavored  to  change 
the  existing  status   of  dentistry,   by   securing   recognition 


206  APPENDIX. 

under  the  new  Medical  Act  of  1843,  which  was  then  being 
introduced  by  Sir  James  Graham.  The  medical  profession 
objected  to  such  measures,  on  the  grounds  that  they  did  not 
desire  the  dentists  to  appear  as  on  equal  footing  with  them- 
Belves. 

The  dental  profession  at  this  time,  says  Dr.  James  Smith 
(Encyclopaedia  Britannica),  may  be  said  to  have  divided 
itself  into  three  sections:  First,  those  who  desired  to  see  all 
the  dentists  fully  qualified  surgeons;  second,  those  who 
wished  them  to  have  only  a  certain  amount  of  surgical 
knowledge,  and  in  this  way  to  be  subordinate  to  fully  quali- 
fied practitioners ;  and,  third,  those  who  advocated  dentists 
being  altogether  disassociated  from  surgeons,  and  having  a 
college  and  diploma  of  their  own. 

The  tendency  of  desiring  to  be  recognized  as  a  specialty 
of  medicine,  or  as  a  kind  of  surgeon,  again  seemed  rife 
among  dentists  of  that  period,  as  the  idea  of  the  dental  col- 
lege and  diploma  was  abandoned  for  the  prospect  of  being 
attached  in  some  way  or  other  to  the  Ro}al  College  of  Sur- 
geons of  England.  Many  difficulties  existed,  however,  which 
at  first  precluded  the  consummation  of  this  arrangement. 

The  full  medical  or  surgical  education,  which  was 
deemed  desirable,  in  addition  to  the  mechanical  acquire- 
ments which  dentistry  required,  would  have  entailed  a  pro- 
tracted period  of  education,  such  as  few  would  desire  to 
undertake.  These  representations  were  set  aside  in  1858, 
when  the  necessity  for  some  improved  system  of  dental  edu- 
cation was  more  fully  recognized  ;  and  "  power  was  given 
Queen  Victoria  to  grant  a  charter  to  the  Royal  College  of 
Surgeons  of  England,  authorizing  that  body  to  institute  and 
hold  examinations,  for  the  purpose  of  testing  the  fitness  of 
persons  to  practice  as  dentists,  and  to  award  certificates  of 
such  fitness."  (21  and  22  Vict.,  c.  90,  s.  48— Daniel  Xason.) 

The  3'ear  following,  the  charter  was  granted.  This  did 
not  entitle  them  to  register  as  regularly  qualified  practition- 
ers, though  to  a  certain  extent  they  received  a  statutory 
status;  and  though  they  might  recover  their  reasonable 
charges  for  work,  labor  done  and  materials  supplied,  they 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  207 

could  not  recover  such  charges,  because  of  their  holding  cer- 
tificates from  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons. — Greenwood, 
Laws. 

The  title  of  "  dentist "  was  not  protected,  nor  was  the 
practice  of  dentistry  restricted  solely  to  persons  holding  cer- 
tificates from  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  of  England,  as 
the  Act  itself  expressly  declared  that  nothing  therein  con- 
tained should  be  construed  to  prejudice  or  affect  in  any  man- 
ner the  lawful  occupation,  trade  or  business  of  dentistry. 

The  law  remained  unchanged  until  the  Dentists'  Act 
was  passed  in  1878. 

This  amendment  of  the  law  relating  to  dentists  practi- 
cing in  the  United  Kingdoms,  provided,  that, from  and  after 
the  first  of  April,  1879,  no  one,  under  a  penalty  not  exceed- 
ing £200,  on  conviction,  excepting  those  who  are  legally 
qualified  medical  practitioners,  shall  take  or  use  the  name  or 
title  of  dentist,  either  alone  or  in  combination  with  any  other 
word  or  words,  or  of  dental  practitioner,  or  any  name,  title, 
addition  or  description,  implying  that  he  is  registered  under 
this  Act,  or  that  he  is  a  person  specially  qualified  to  practice 
dentistry,  unless  he  is  so  registered,  and  further,  unless  so 
registered,  or  unless  a  legally  qualified  medical  practitioner, 
no  one  can  recover  any  fee  or  charge  in  any  court  for  the 
performance  of  any  dental  operation,  or  for  any  dental  at- 
tendance or  advice.  Any  one  is  entitled  to  register  under 
the  Dentists'  Act,  who  is  a  licentiate  in  dental  surgery,  or 
dentistry,  of  any  of  the  medical  authorities,  or  who  is  entitled 
to  registration  as  a  foreign  or  colonial  dentist ;  or  who  was 
bona  fide  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  either  alone  or 
in  conjunction  with  the  practice  of  medicine,  surgery,  or 
pharmacy  on  or  before  July  22nd,  1878. — Daniel  Nason. 

The  earlier  existence  of  dentistry  in  America  presented 
an  aspect  exactly  similar  to  its  foundation  in  England — it 
was  but  the  beginning  of  a  science,  the  rudiments  of  which 
were  unknown.  Each  practitioner  had  his  own  methods,  as 
there  were  then  no  recognized  systems  of  practice.  Dentis- 
try was  then  practiced  as  a  secret  art,  and  its  disciples  evi- 
denced great  exclusiveness,  and  carefully  hid  from  each  other 


208  APPENDIX. 

the  methods  by  which  they  attained,  or  thought  they  attained, 

any  superiority.  Thus  it  came  that  the  great  majority  of 
early  practitioners  were  empiric,  and,  though  it  was  the  de- 
sire of  the  regular  practitioners  to  prohibit  this  empiricism, 
there  were  many  objections  to  any  application  for  prohibitory 

legislation.  Chief  among  them,  the  tact  that  they  would  be 
compelled  to  divulge  their  secret  modes  of  practice,  and  thus 
give  their  professional  brethren,  perchance,  the  opportunity 
of  adopting  them  and  becoming  as  skillful  as  themselves. 

At  that  time,  dentists  of  ability  and  merit  easily  com- 
manded all  the  practice  they  could  attend,  and  consequently 
contented  themselves  with  railing  at  such  dental  operators  as 
were,  or  as  they  conceived  to  be,  below  them  in  scientific  or 
practical  status,  being  well  aware  that  they  were  secure  in 
the  position  they  had  gained  in  public  estimation,  and  car- 
ing little  for  aught  else.  There  was  another  fact  which  also 
operated  strongly  against  any  movement  of  the  better  class 
of  dentists  towards  legislative  protection  against  empiricism. 
This  was,  that  the  majority  of  persons  practicing  dentistry 
in  this  country  was,  in  those  times,  composed  of  the  very 
class  against  which  any  such  enactment  would,  perforce,  have 
been  aimed.  This  class,  although  certainly  not  influential  in 
individuality,  was  yet  so  as  a  whole,  and  could  not  be  ig- 
nored— and  might  possibly  not  have  been  overcome — in  any 
contest  such  as  would  surely  have  arisen  on  the  question  of 
dental  legislation. — History  of  Dental  and  Oral  Sciences  in 
America. 

Alabama,  almost  the  poorest  in  skilled  dentists,  att  he 
time,  of  any  state  in  the  Union,  was  the  first  state  in 
America  to  pass  a  dental  enactment,  and,  indeed,  it  was  the 
first  legislation  covering  the  dental  profession.  The  effect  of 
this  enactment  was  probably  more  to  suppress  irregular  prac- 
titioners than  to  elevate  the  standard  of  professional  acquire- 
ments in  dentistry.  The  latter,  in  fact,  has  proved  an  exceed- 
ingly difficult  operation,  through  legislative  action  in  later 
days  and  with  the  most  approved  form  of  law,  and  great  suc- 
cess in  this  direction  cannot  be  expected  of  so  crude  a  statute, 
and  in  times  such  as  were  those  in  which  it  was  passed. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  209 

After  1840,  dentistry  was  blessed  with  a  period  of  prog- 
ress, and  generally  accorded  a  scientific  standing,  such  as  it 
had  never  before  known.  The  graduates  of  dental  colleges 
multiplied,  and  were  better  qualified  than  formerly.  This 
condition  of  dentistry  continued  for  a  period  of  about  twenty- 
five  years,  when  the  dentists  realized  that  self-government  in 
dentistry  appeared  to  have,  at  that  time,  fulfilled  its  possi- 
bilities, and  the  profession  cast  about  for  some  new  and  bet- 
ter method  of  government  to  replace  it.  With  this  end  in 
view,  they  resorted  to  the  original  method  put  in  operation 
by  Alabama  twenty-five  years  previous. 

Several  states,  notably  Kentucky,  Pennsylvania,  and 
New  York,  attempted  to  procure  legislative  action  in  dentis-< 
try  about  1860-68.  Kentucky  failed  at  first,  but  subsequently 
obtained  an  enactment  in  1868.  New  York  was  the  first, 
after  Alabama,  to  procure  a  special  legislative  enactment  rela- 
tive to  dentistry.  At  the  present  time,  nearly  every  state  in 
the  Union  has  some  form  of  protective  dental  legislation,  the 
requirements  in  most  cases  being  that  the  dentist  must  possess 
a  diploma  from  a  reputable  and  recognized  dental  college,  or 
pass  the  examination  of  the  State  Board  of  Examiners,  as 
required  by  the  special  enactments  of  the  states  ;  the  failure 
to  comply  with  these  requirements  is  punished  by  a  fine,  im- 
prisonment, or  both. 


210  APPENDIX. 

THE  STATUTES  REGULATING  THE    PRACTICE  OF  DENTISTRY  IN  THE 

UNITED  STATES,  ENGLAND,  CANADA,  ITALY, 

FRANCE,    GERMANY,  SPAIN, 

RUSSIA,  ETC. 

ALABAMA. 

An  Act  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Dental  Surgery,  and  for  other 

purposes. 

Section  1.  Re  it  enacted  by  the  Sevate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  State  of  Alabama,  in  General  Assembly  con- 
vened, That  from  and  after  the  first  Monday  in  December 
next,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  of  the  medical  boards  of  this 
State  to  examine  and  license  applicants  to  practice  dental  sur- 
gery, under  the  same  rules  and  regulations,  and  subject  to  the 
same  restrictions  as  those  who  apply  for  license  to  practice 
medicine ;  and,  in  order  more  fully  to  carry  this  Act  into 
effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  of  the  medical  boards, 
where  the  same  is  practicable,  to  add  to  their  body,  by  elec- 
tion, a  professional  dentist  having  the  requisite  qualifications, 
which  dentist  so  added  shall  constitute  a  part  of  the  board. 

Sec.  2.  That  if  any  person  styling  himself  as  dentist, 
or  other  person,  shall  engage  in  the  practice  of  dental  sur- 
gery as  a  professional  business,  after  the  aforesaid  first  Mon- 
day in  December  next,  without  having  been  regularly 
licensed  so  to  do  by  one  of  the  Medical  Boards  of  this  State,  as 
hereinbefore  provided  for,  for  every  such  offense  shall  forfeit 
and  pay  a  sum  not  exceeding  fifty  dollars,  recoverable  before 
any  court  having  jurisdiction  of  the  same,  one-half  to  the 
informer,  the  other  half  to  the  county  where  suit  is  brought. 

Sec.  3.  That  all  bonds,  notes,  or  promissory  obliga- 
tions, or  assumpsits,  made  to  any  person  or  persons  not 
authorized  as  provided  for  in  this  Act,  the  consideration  of 
which  shall  be  for  services  rendered  as  a  professional  dentist, 
or  in  the  line  of  professional  dentistry,  shall  be  utterly  void 
and  of  no  effect ;  provided,  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  not 
be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  persons  from  practicing  dental 
surgery,  who  have  a  license  to  practice  surgery  and  medicine 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  211 

from  either  of  the  Medical  Boards  of  this  State,  or  diploma 
from  any  regularl}T  constituted  institution  in  the  United 
States. 

Sec.  4.  That  hereafter  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  prac- 
ticing physicians,  surgeons,  and  dentists,  to  have  their 
licenses  recorded  in  the  office  of  the  Clerk  of  the  County  Court 
in  which  they  may  reside,  and  the  certificate  of  the  clerk 
shall  be  considered  as  good  evidence  in  any  court  of  the  right 
of  any  individual  having  a  diploma  or  license  to  practice  hi& 
profession,  and  recover  his  debts  for  the  same. 

Sec.  5.  That  all  laws,  and  parts  of  laws,  contravening 
the  provisions  of  this  Act,  be  and  the  same  are  hereby 
repealed. 

Approved  December  31st,  1841. 

This  Act  continued  upon  the  statute  book  until  1881, 
when  a  new  Act  was  passed  by  the  Legislature.  The  follow- 
ing is  the  text  of  the  amendment : 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of 

Alabama. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of 
Alabama,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it 
shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  the  State  of  Alabama,  unless  said  person  has 
obtained  license  from  a  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  duly 
authorized  and  appointed  by  this  Act  to  issue  such  license ; 
provided,  that  dentists  who  have  been  in  the  regular  practice 
of  dentistry  for  five  years  next  preceding  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  shall  not  be  required  to  submit  to  an  examination,  and 
shall  be  entitled  to  license  without  fee,  which  shall  be  trans- 
mitted to  him,  by  mail  or  otherwise,  upon  his  application, 
accompanied  by  an  affidavit  to  the  fact  of  his  having  been 
in  the  regular  practice  for  the  required  time. 

Sec  2.  That  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  con- 
sist of  five  (5)  dental  graduates,  or  practitioners  of  dentistry, 
who  have  obtained  a  license  to  practice  dentistry  from  a 
Medical  Board  in  this  State,  or  from  a  Dental  Board  organized 
under  this  Act,  and  who  are  members  in  good  standing  of 


212  APPENDIX. 

the  Alabama  Dental  Association;  provided,  that  said  gradu- 
ates, or  practitioners,  have  been  praticing  dentistry   in  the 

State  of  Alabama  for  a  period  not  less  than  three  (3)  years  ; 
and  provided  farther,  that  the  first  Board  of  Examiners 
under  this  Act  shall  consist  of  the  present  Executive  Commit- 
tee of  the  Alabama  Dental  Association,  who  shall  hold  office 
until  the  next  annual  meeting  of  the  said  association,  and 
until  their  successors  are  elected  and  qualified,  as  herein- 
after provided. 

Sec.  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  said  Alabama 
Dental  Association,  at  its  annual  meeting  next  after  the  pas- 
sage of  this  Act,  and  every  two  years  thereafter,  to  elect  said 
Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall  hold  office  for  the  term  of 
two  (2)  years,  and  until  their  successors  are  elected  and  quali- 
fied. The  President  of  said  Association  shall  have  power 
to  fill  all  vacancies  in  said  board  for  unexpired  terms. 

Sec.  4.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Board  of 
Examiners,  First,  To  meet  annually  at  the  time  and  place  of 
meeting  of  the  Alabama  Dental  Association,  or  oftener,  at 
the  call  of  any  three  of  the  members  of  said  board.  Thirty 
days'  notice  must  be  given  of  the  time  and  place  of  meet- 
ing of  said  board,  said  notice  to  be  mailed  to  all  practi- 
cing dentists  in  the  State.  Secondly,  To  prescribe  a  course 
of  reading  for  those  who  study  dentistry  under  private  in- 
struction. Thirdly,  To  grant  a  license  to  any  applicant  who 
shall  furnish  satisfactory  evidence  of  having  graduated  and 
received  a  diploma  from  any  incorporated  dental  college,  or 
who  has  heretofore  received  a  license  from  a  medical  board 
in  this  State,  without  examination  or  fee.  Fourthly,  To 
grant  licenses  to  all  other  applicants  who  undergo  a  satisfac- 
tory examination,  who  shall  pay  to  the  said  board  a  fee  of 
five  dollars  for  said  license.  Fifthly,  To  keep  a  book  in 
which  shall  be  registered  the  names  of  all  persons  licensed 
to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec  5.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  rec- 
ord, and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who 
has  it  in  keeping,  with  the  common  seal  of  said  board,  shall 
be  evidence  in  any  court  of  this  State. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  213 

Sec.  6.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  consti- 
tute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  should  a 
quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  its  meeting, 
those  present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until  a  quorum 
is  present. 

Sec.  7.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
license  for  an  applicant  to  practice  until  the  next  regular 
meeting  of  the  board,  when  he  shall  report  the  fact,  at  which 
time  the  temporary  license  shall  expire,  but  such  temporary 
license  shall  not  be  granted  by  a  member  of  the  board  after 
the  board  has  rejected  the  applicant. 

Sec.  8.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this 
Act,  practice  dentistry  in  this  State  for  a  fee  or  reward,  shall 
be  liable  to  indictment,  and,  on  conviction,  shall  be  fined  not 
less  than  fifty,  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dollars ;  pro- 
vided, that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent 
persons  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  9.  That  on  the  trial  of  such  indictment,  it  shall 
be  incumbent  upon  the  defendant,  to  exempt  himself  from 
the  penalties  of  this  Act,  to  show  that  he  has  authority,  un- 
der the  law,  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec  10.  That  every  person  to  whom  license  is  issued  by 
said  Board  of  Examiners  shall,  within  thirty  days  from  the 
date  thereof,  present  the  same  to  the  Judge  of  the  Probate 
Court  of  the  county  in  which  he  resides,  who  shall  officially 
endorse  said  license  and  seal  it  with  the  seal  of  the  court,  and 
who  shall  record  said  license  in  a  proper  book  in  his  office, 
and  who  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  a  fee  of  one  (1)  dollar 
for  his  services,  but  a  temporary  license  issued  under  section 
7,  of  this  Act,  need  not  be  sealed  or  recorded. 

Sec  11.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  solicitors  of 
this  State  to  prosecute  all  persons  violating  all  or  any  por- 
tion of  this  Act. 

Sec.  12.  That  all  laws,  or  parts  of  laws,  in  conflict  with 
this  Act,  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  repealed. 

Approved  February  11th,  1881. 


214  APPENDIX. 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the   Practice  of  Dentistry    in  the  State  of 

Alabama. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  bij  the  General  Assembly  of 
Alabama,  That  from  and  ai'ter  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it  shall 
he  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  the  State  of  Alahama,  unless  said  person  has 
obtained  license  from  a  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  duly 
authorized  and  appointed  hy  this  Act  to  issue  such  license; 
provided,  that  dentists  who  have  been  in  the  regular  practice 
of  dentistry  for  five  years  next  preceding  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  shall  not  be  required  to  submit  to  an  examination,  and 
shall  be  entitled  to  license  without  fee,  which  shall  be  trans- 
mitted to  him,  by  mail  or  otherwise,  upon  his  application 
accompanied  by  an  affidavit  to  the  fact  of  his  having  been  in 
the  practice  for  the  required  time. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  con- 
sist of  live  (5)  dental  graduates,  or  practitioners  of  dentistry, 
who  have  obtained  a  license  to  practice  dentistry  from  a  Den- 
tal Board  organized  under  this  Act,  and  who  are  members  in 
good  standing  of  the  Alabama  Dental  Association  ;  provided, 
that  said  graduates  or  practitioners  have  been  practicing 
dentistry  in  the  State  of  Alabama  for  a  period  of  not  less 
than  three  (3)  years. 

Sec.  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Alabama 
Dental  Association,  at  its  annual  meeting  in  April,  1887,  to 
elect  said  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  whose  terms  of  office 
shall  be  respectively  five,  four,  three,  two  and  one  year,  in 
the  order  in  which  they  are  elected ;  and  at  each  annual 
meeting  of  said  association  thereafter,  one  member  shall  be 
elected  to  fill  such  vacancy,  who  shall  serve  for  the  period  of 
five  years.  The  President  shall  have  the  power  to  fill  all 
vacancies  in  said  board  for  the  unexpired  term. 

Sec  4.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Board  of  Exam- 
iners, First,  To  meet  annually  at  the  time  and  place  of  meet- 
ing of  the  Alabama  Dental  Association,  or  oftener,at  the  call 
of  any  three  members  of  the  board.     Thirty  days'  notice  must 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  215 

be  given  of  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  said  board,  said 
notice  to  be  mailed  to  all  practicing  dentists  in  the  State. 
Secondly,  To  prescribe  a  course  of  reading  for  those  who 
study  dentistry  under  private  instruction.  Thirdly,  To  grant 
license  to  all  applicants  who  undergo  a  satisfactory  examina- 
tion, who  shall  pay  to  the  said  board  a  fee  of  five  dollars  for 
said  license.  Fourthly,  To  keep  a  book  in  which  shall  be 
registered  the  names  of  all  persons  licensed  to  practice  den- 
tistry in  this  State. 

Sec.  5.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has  it 
in  keeping,  with  the  common  seal  of  said  board,  shall  be 
evidence  in  any  court  of  this  State. 

Sec  6.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  consti- 
tute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  should  a 
quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  its  meeting, 
those  present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until  a  quorum 
is  present. 

Sec  7.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
license  for  an  application  to  practice  until  the  next  regular 
meeting  of  the  board,  when  he  shall  report  the  fact,  at  which 
time  the  temporary  license  shall  expire  ;  but  such  temporary 
license  shall  not  he  granted  by  a  member  of  the  board  after 
the  board  has  rejected  the  applicant. 

Sec  8.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this 
Act,  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  shall  be  liable  to  indict- 
ment, and,  on  conviction,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty,  nor 
more  than  three  hundred  dollars ;  provided,  that  nothing  in 
this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  persons  from  extract- 
ing teeth  ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  con- 
strued as  to  require  any  person  who  is  now  lawfully  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry,  to  procure  any  additional  license 
or  to  attend  any  meeting  or  meetings  of  the  State  Dental 
Association. 

Sec  9.  That  on  the  trial  of  such  indictment,  it  shall  be 
incumbent  upon  the  defendant,  to  exempt  himself  from  the 


216  APPENDIX. 

penalties  of  this  Act,  to  show  that  he  lias  authority  under 
the  law  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec.  10.  That  every  person  to  whom  license  is  issued 
by  said  Board  of  Examiners,  shall,  within  thirty  days  from 
date  thereof,  present  the  same  to  the  Judge  of  the  Probate 
Court  of  the  county  in  which  he  resides,  who  shall  officially 
indorse  said  license  and  seal  it  with  the  seal  of  the  court,  and 
who  shall  record  said  license  in  a  book  in  his  office,  and  who 
shall  be  entitled  to  a  fee  of  one  (1)  dollar  for  his  services ;  but 
a  temporary  license,  issued  under  section  7  of  this  Act,  need 
not  be  sealed  or  recorded. 

Sec.  11.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  solicitors  of 
this  State  to  prosecute  all  persons  violating  all  or  any  portion 
of  this  Act. 

Sec  12.  That  all  laws  or  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  with 
this  Act,  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  repealed. 

Amended  and  approved  February  28th,  1887. 


ARKANSAS. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice,  of  Dentistry,  and  Punish  Vio- 
lators thereof,  in  the  State  of  Arkansas. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  State  of  Arkansas,  That  it 
shall  be  unlawful  tor  any  person  to  practice,  or  attempt  to 
practice,  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  State  of  Arkansas 
without  first  having  received  a  certificate  from  the  Board  of 
Dental  Examiners. 

Sec  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  consisting  of  five  prac- 
ticing dentists,  residents  of  this  State,  is  hereby  created,  who 
shall  have  authority  to  issue  certificates  to  persons  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this  State  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  also  to  decide  upon  the 
validity  of  such  diplomas  as  may  be  subsequently  presented 
tor  registration,  as  hereinafter  provided. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  217 

Sec.  8.  The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed 
by  the  Governor,  and  shall  serve  for  a  term  of  four  years, 
excepting  that  the  members  of  the  board  first  appointed  shall 
hold  their  offices,  as  follows :  Three,  for  two,  and  two  for 
four  years,  respectively,  and  until  their  successors  are  duly 
appointed.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board, 
such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  appointment  by  the  Governor. 

Sec  4.  Said  board  shall  keep  a  record,  in  which  shall  be 
registered  the  names  and  residences  or  places  of  business  of  all 
persons  authorized  under  this  Act  to  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  in  this  State.  It  shall  elect  one  of  its  mem- 
bers President  and  one  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet 
at  least  once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener,  and  at  such 
times  and  places  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A  majority  of 
the  members  of  said  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and 
the  proceedings  thereof  shall  be  at  all  times  open  for  public 
inspection. 

Sec  5.  Every  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tisty  or  dental  surgery  within  this  State  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  within  three  months  thereafter, 
cause  his  or  her  name  and  residence  and  place  of  busi- 
ness to  be  registered  with  said  Board  of  Examiners  ;  upon 
which  said  board  shall  issue  to  such  person  a  certificate,  duly 
signed  by  a  majority  of  the  members  of  said  board,  and 
which  certificate  shall  entitle  the  person  to  whom  it  is  issued 
to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  set  forth  in  section  1  of  this 
Act. 

Sec  6.  To  provide  for  the  proper  and  effective  enforce- 
ment of  this  Act,  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  entitled  to 
the  following  fees,  to  wit :  For  each  certificate  issued  to 
persons  in  practice  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of 
this  Act,  the  sum  of  one  dollar;  for  each  certificate  issued  to 
persons  not  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State 
at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  the  sum  of  five  dollars. 

Sec  7.  That  members  of  said  board  shall  each  receive 
the  compensation  of  two  dollars  and  a  half  per  day  for  each 
day  actually  engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office,  which, 
together  with  all  other  legitimate  expenses  incurred  in  the 


218  APPENDIX. 

performance  of  such  duties,  shall  be  paid  from  fees  received 
by  the  board  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act ;  and  no  part  of 
the  expenses  of  said  board  shall  at  any  time  be  paid  out  of 
the  State  Treasury.  All  moneys  in  excess  of  said  per  diem 
allowance  and  other  expenses,  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary 
of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  the  expenses  of 
said  board,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board  shall  from  time 
to  time  direct ;  and  such  board  shall  make  an  annual  report 
of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the  fifteenth  day  of 
December  of  each  year,  together  with  an  account  of  all 
moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them  in  pursuance  of 
this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  thi3  Act  by  prac- 
ticing, or  attempting  to  practice,  dentistry  within  the  State, 
without  first  complying  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  con- 
viction thereof,  shall  be  fined  in  any  sum  not  less  than  ten 
dollars,  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  said  fines  to  be 
applied  to  the  school  fund  of  the  district  in  which  the 
offense  is  committed. 

Sec.  9.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  publication. 

Approved  by  the  Governor  on  the  2nd  of  April,  1887. 


CALIFORNIA. 


The  following  is  the  text  of  "An  Act  to  Insure  the  Better  Education 
of  Practitioners  of  Dental  Surgery  and  to  Regulate  the  Prac- 
tice of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  California." 

Section  1.  Ike  people  of  the  State  of  California,  repre- 
sented in  Senate  and  Assembly,  do  enact,  as  follows :  It  shall  be 
unlawful  for  any  person,  who  is  not  at  the  time  of  the  passage 
of  this  Act  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State, 
to  commence  such  practice,  unless  he  or  she  shall  have  ob- 
tained a  certificate  as  hereinafter  provided. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  219 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  seven  prac- 
ticing dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to 
carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 
The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor from  the  dental  profession  of  the  State  at  large.  The 
term  for  which  the  members  of  said  board  shall  hold  their 
offices  shall  be  four  years,  except  that  two  of  the  members  of 
the  board,  first  to  be  appointed  under  this  Act,  shall  hold 
their  office  for  the  term  of  one  year,  two  for  the  term  of  two 
years,  two  for  the  term  of  three  years,  and  one  for  the  term  of 
four  years,  respectively,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly 
appointed  and  qualified.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said 
board,  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor  in  con- 
formity witn  this  section. 

Sec  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members  Presi- 
dent, and  one  the  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet  at  least 
once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener  and  at  such  times  and 
places  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A  majority  of  said  board 
shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  proceedings 
thereof  shall  at  all  reasonable  times  be  open  to  public  inspec- 
tion. 

Sec  4.  Within  six  months  from  the  time  that  this  Act 
takes  effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  now 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  to  cause 
his  or  her  name  and  residence  or  place  of  business  to  be  regis- 
tered with  said  Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall  keep  a  book 
for  that  purpose.  The  statement  of  every  such  person  shall 
be  verified  under  oath  before  a  Notary  Public  or  Justice  of  the 
Peace,  in  such  manner  as  may  be  prescribed  by  the  Board  of 
Examiners.  Every  person  who  shall  so  register  with  said 
board  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry,  shall  receive  a  certificate 
to  that  effect,  and  may  continue  to  practice  as  such  without 
incurring  any  of  the  liabilities  or  penalties  provided  in  this 
Act,  and  shall  pay  to  the  Board  of  Examiners  for  such  regis- 
tration a  fee  of  one  dollar.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board 
of  Examiners  to  forward  to  the  County  Clerk  of  each  county 
in  the  State  a  certified  list  of  the  names  of  all  persons  resid- 
ing in  his  county,  who  have  registered  in  accordance  with  the 


220  APPENDIX. 

provisions  of  this  Act,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  County 
Clerks  to  register  such  names  in  a  book  kept  for  that  purpose. 

Sec.  5.  Any  and  all  persons  who  shall  so  desire  may 
appear  before  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and 
be  examined  with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in 
dental  surgery ;  and  if  the  examination  of  any  such  person  or 
persons  shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  Board  of 
Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons  as  they  shall  find  to  pos- 
sess the  requisite  qualifications  a  certificate  to  that  effect,  in 
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  Said  board 
shall  also  indorse,  as  satisfactory,  diplomas  from  any  reputable 
dental  college,  when  satisfied  of  the  character  of  such  institu- 
tion, upon  the  holder  furnishing  evidence  satisfactory  to  the 
board  of  his  or  her  right  to  the  same,  and  shall  issue  certifi- 
cates to  that  effect  within  ten  days  thereafter.  All  certifi- 
cates issued  by  said  board  shall  be  signed  by  its  officers,  and 
such  certificates  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  right  of 
the  holder  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  California. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  dollars, 
nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  or  be  confined  six  months 
in  the  county  jail  for  each  and  every  offense.  All  fines  re- 
covered under  this  Act  shall  be  paid  into  the  common  school 
fund  of  the  county  in  which  said  conviction  takes  place. 

Sec.  7.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  maintaining  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  said  Board  of 
Examiners  shall  charge  each  person  applying  to  or  appearing 
before  them  for  examination  for  a  certificate  of  qualifications 
a  fee  of  ten  dollars,  which  fee  shall  in  no  case  be  returned  ; 
and  out  of  the  funds  coming  into  possession  of  the  board  from 
the  fees  so  charged  and  penalties  received  under  the  provi- 
sions of  this  Act,  all  legitimate  and  necessary  expenses  in- 
curred in  attending  the  meetings  of  said  board  shall  be  paid, 
and  no  part  of  the  expenses  of  the  board  shall  ever  be  paid 
out  of  the  State  Treasury.  All  moneys  received  in  excess  of 
expenses  above  provided  for  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary  of 
said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  the  expenses  of  said 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  221 

board  and  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  he  giving 
such  bonds  as  the  board  shall  from  time  to  time  direct.  And 
said  board  shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to 
the  Governor  by  the  first  of  December  of  each  year,  together 
with  an  account  of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed  by 
them  pursuant  to  this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  Any  person  who  shall  receive  a  certificate  from 
said  board  to  practice  dentistry  shall  cause  his  or  her  certifi- 
cate to  be  registered  with  the  County  Clerk  of  the  county  in 
which  such  person  may  reside,  and  the  County  Clerk  shall 
charge  for  registering  such  certificate  a  fee  of  one  dollar- 
Any  failure,  neglect,  or  refusal  on  the  part  of  any  person 
holding  such  certificate  to  register  the  same  with  the  County 
Clerk,  as  above  directed,  for  a  period  of  six  months,  shall  work 
a  forfeiture  of  the  certificate ;  and  no  certificate,  when  once 
forfeited,  shall  be  restored,  except  upon  the  payment  to  the 
said  Board  of  Examiners  of  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars  as 
a  penalty  for  such  neglect,  failure,  or  refusal. 

Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  knowingly  and  falsely 
claim  or  pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  license, 
diploma,  or  degree  granted  by  any  society  organized  under 
and  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  who  shall  falsely 
and,  with  intent  to  deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pretend  to  be 
a  graduate  from  any  incorporated  dental  college,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  liable  to  the 
same  penalty  as  provided  in  section  6. 

Sec.  10.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to 
prohibit  any  practicing  physician  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  11.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


COLORADO. 


Following  is  the  text  of  the  law  recently  passed  entitled  uAn  Act  to 
Insure  the  Efficiency  of  Practitioners  of  Dental  Surgery  arid 
to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Colorado." 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Slate  of  Colorado,  No  person  shall  practice  dentistry  in  this 


222  APPENDIX. 

State  until  he  or  she  shall  have  obtained  a  license  for  such 
purpose  as  hereinafter  provided,  but  nothing  in  this  Act 
shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  any  physician  or  surgeon  from 
extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  A  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  be  and 
is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  enforce  and  exe- 
cute the  provisions  of  this  Act.  The  said  board  shall  con- 
sist of  five  members,  who  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate. 
Each  member  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed  for  the  term 
of  two  years,  and  hold  his  office  until  his  successor  be  duly 
appointed.  Vacancies  occurring  in  said  board  shall  be  filled 
by  the  Governor. 

Sec.  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  from  its  members  a  Pres- 
ident, Secretary  and  Treasurer  thereof,  and  shall  meet  at  least 
once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener  and  at  such  times  and 
places  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  The  first  meeting  of  said 
board  shall  be  held  within  sixty  days  after  the  time  this 
Act  will  go  into  force  and  effect,  at  the  Capitol  of  the  State. 
A  majority  of  said  board  shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quo- 
rum, and  the  proceedings  thereof  shall  at  all  reasonable 
times  be  opened  to  public  inspection. 

Sec.  4.  Any  person  desirous  of  continuing  the  practice 
of  dentistry  within  this  State,  shall  appear  in  person  before 
said  board  at  the  first  or  any  subsequent  meeting  of  said 
board,  at  such  time  and  place  as  the  board  may  designate, 
and  submit  to  an  examination  by  said  board,  to  determine 
his  or  her  ability  to  continue  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this 
State ;  provided,  however,  that  the  Secretary  of  said  board 
may,  upon  application  of  any  such  person,  issue  a  permit  to 
temporarily  practice  dentistry  until  the  next  meeting  of  the 
board,  but  not  longer,  unless  the  board  at  such  meetings  shall 
extend  said  temporary  permit,  and  such  person  making 
application  for  examination  by  the  board  as  aforesaid,  shall 
deposit  with  the  Secretary  of  said  board,  a  fee  of  ten  (10) 
dollars  as  compensation  for  making  said  examination.  All 
persons  who  may  be  found  qualified  by  said  board,  upon  any 
such  examination,  to  continue  the  practice  of  dentistry  in 


DENTAL  JURISPRUDENCE.  223 

this  State,  shall  receive  from  said  board  a  certificate  signed 
by  the  President  and  attested  by  the  Secretary,  under  official 
seal  of  said  board,  authorizing  the  holder  thereof  to  there- 
after continue  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec.  5.  Any  and  all  persons  who  so  desire  may  appear 
before  said  board  at  any  one  of  its  meetings,  and  be  exam- 
ined with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in  dental 
surgery,  and,  if  the  examination  of  any  such  person  or  per- 
sons shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  Board  of 
Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons  as  they  shall  find,  from 
such  examinations,  to  possess  the  requisite  qualifications,  a 
license  to  practice  dentistry  in  accordance  with  the  provi- 
sions of  this  Act. 

Sec  6.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  provi- 
sions of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  shall  be  liable  to  prosecution  before  any  court  of  compe- 
tent jurisdiction,  and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  punished  by  a 
fine  in  a  sum  not  less  than  one  hundred  (100)  dollars,  nor 
more  than  five  hundred  (500)  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment 
from  one  to  ninety  days,  or  both,  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court.  Each  day  that  this  Act  is  violated,  shall  be  considered 
a  separate  offense. 

Sec.  7.  Said  board  shall  be  authorized,  out  of  the  funds 
coming  into  its  possession  from  the  fees  authorized  by  this 
Act,  to  pay  to  each  member  thereof,  such  compensation  as 
the  board  may  determine,  and  all  legitimate  and  necessary 
expenses  incurred  in  attending  the  meetings  of  said  board. 
Said  expenses  shall  be  paid  only  from  the  fees  received  by 
the  board  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  no  part  of  the 
compensation  or  other  expenses  of  the  board  shall  ever  be  a 
charge  against  or  paid  out  of  the  State  Treasury.  All  moneys 
received  in  excess  of  said  expenses  shall  be  held  by  the  Treas- 
urer of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  the  meeting  of  the 
expenses  of  said  board,  by  giving  such  bond  as  the  board 
shall  from  time  to  time  direct.  Said  board  shall  make  a  bi- 
annual report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor,  by  the 
fifteenth  day  of  December  of  the  year  immediately  preceding 
the  next  ensuing  session  of  the  Legislature,  together  with  an 


224  APPFNDIX. 

account  of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  tbem  pur- 
suant to  tliis  Act. 

I  hereby  certify  that  I  have  compared  this  copy  with 
the  original  and  find  it  to  be  correct. 

1'.  C.  French, 

Chief  Enrolling  Clerk. 

The  following  constitute  the  Board  of  Examiners  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor  in  pursuance  of  the  provisions  of 
the  Act :  J.  X.  Chipley,  D.D.S.,  Pueblo  ;  P.  T.  Smith,  D.D.S., 
Denver ;  J.  M.  Porter,  D.D.S.,  Denver  ;  M.  J.  Norman,  D.D.S., 
Denver  ;   and  Eugene  Fowler,  Colorado  Springs. 


CONNECTICUT. 


An   Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of 

Connecticut. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of 
Representatives  of  the  State  of  Connecticut,  in  General  Assembly 
convened,  That  it  will  be  unlawful  for  any  person  who  is 
not  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  to  commence  such  practice, 
unless  such  person  shall  have  received  a  diploma  from  the 
faculty  of  some  dental  school  duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of 
this  or  some  foreign  country,  in  which  college  there  was 
delivered  annually,  at  the  time  said  diploma  was  granted,  a 
full  course  of  lectures  and  instructions  on  dentistry,  or  shall 
have  had  eighteen  months'  pupilage  in  a  dental  office ;  and 
in  addition  thereto  shall  have  attended  one  full  course  of 
lectures  in  some  such  college  as  specified  above,  or  in  case  of 
removal  from  another  State  or  county,  shall  have  received  a 
certificate  from  some  lawful  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  or 
have  had  six  years'  regular  dental  practice ;  provided,  that 
nothing  in  this  Act  shall  interfere  with  physicians  in  dis- 
charge of  their  professional  duties ;  and  further  provided,  that 
this  Act  shall  not  apply  to  any  student  studying  or  practi- 
cing in  the  office  of  any  dentist  in  this  State. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  225 

Sec.  2.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  the  provisions  of 
this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon 
conviction  thereof,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more 
than  two  hundred  dollars  for  each  offense. 

Approved  by  the  Governor,  the  4th  of  April,  1887. 


DELAWARE. 


The  Delaware  Dental  Law,  Passed  at  Dover,  March  31st,  1885. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  Del- 
aware, That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  who  is  not, 
at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  a  recognized  practi- 
tioner of  dentistry  in  this  State,  and  so  recognized  by  the 
profession,  to  practice  dentistry,  unless  he  or  she  shall  have 
obtained  a  certificate,  as  hereinafter  provided,  or  shall  hold 
a  diploma  from  a  reputable  dental  college,  and  so  recognized 
by  the  board  herein  created. 

Sec.  2.  That  a  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five 
reputable  practicing  dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty 
it  shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purposes,  and  enforce  the  provi- 
sions of  this  Act ;  the  members  of  said  board  shall  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor,  who  shall  select  them  from  the 
dentists  residing  in  the  State.  The  term  for  which  the  mem- 
bers of  said  board  shall  hold  their  offices  shall  be  four  years, 
except  that  two  members  of  the  board,  first  to  be  appointed 
under  this  Act,  shall  be  designated  by  the  Governor  to  hold 
their  offices  for  the  term  of  two,  and  three,  and  four  years, 
respectively,  unless  sooner  removed  by  the  Governor,  and 
until  their  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed  ;  in  a  case  of 
vacancy  occurring  in  such  board,  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled 
in  like  manner  by  the  Governor. 

Sec.  3.  That  said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  mem- 
bers President,  and  one  Secretary  thereof;  it  shall  fix  the 
time  and   place  of  its  meeting  or  meetings;  a  majority  of 


226  APPENDIX. 

said  board  shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the 
proceedings  thereof  shall  at  all  reasonable  times  be  open  to 
public  inspection  ;  the  board  shall  also  make  an  annual  re- 
port of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor. 

Sec.  4.  That  within  six  months  from  the  time  this  Act 
takes  effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  at 
that  time  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State, 
to  cause  his  or  her  name  and  residence,  or  place  of  business,, 
to  be  registered  with  said  Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall 
keep  a  book  for  that  purpose  ;  the  statement  of  every  such 
purpose  shall  be  verified  under  oath  before  a  Notary  Public 
or  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  such  a  manner  as  may  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  said  Board  of  Examiners.  Every  person  who 
shall  so  register  with  said  board  as  a  practitioner  of  dentis- 
try, may  continue  to  practice  the  same  as  such,  and  shall  re- 
ceive a  certificate  of  such  registration  upon  his  or  her  pay- 
ing the  said  board  one  dollar  for  such  certificate. 

Sec.  5.  That  any  and  all  persons  who  shall  desire  to  com- 
mence such  practice,  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  shall 
appear  before  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and 
be  examined  with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in 
dental  surgery,  and,  if  the  examination  of  any  such  person,, 
or  persons,  shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  Board 
of  Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons  as  they  shall  find 
to  possess  the  requisite  qualifications,  a  certificate  to  that 
effect,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  upon  the 
payment  of  one  dollar  for  such  certificate ;  all  certificates 
issued  by  said  board  shall  be  signed  by  its  officers,  and  such 
certificates  and  diplomas,  granted  as  aforesaid,  shall  be  prima 
facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  Delaware. 

Sec.  6.  That  any  person,  who  shall  wilfully  violate 
any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor  and,  upon  conviction  thereof  in  any  court 
having  criminal  jurisdiction,  maybe  fined  not  less  than  fifty 
dollars,  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dollars,  or  be  confined 
not  more  than  six  months  in  the  county  jail,  in  the  discre- 
tion of  the  court;  all  fines  received  under  this  Act  shall  be 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  227 

paid  into  the  common  school  fund  of  the  city  or  county  in 
which  such  conviction  takes  place. 

Sec.  7.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  meet  within 
thirty  days  after  appointment,  and  frame  By-Laws  govern- 
ing the  board ;  and  any  person,  or  persons,  desiring  to  be  ex- 
amined by  the  Board  of  Examiners  for  a  certificate  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  in  this  State,  shall  give  notice  of  such  desire 
to  the  Secretary  of  said  board,  who  shall  notify  the  members 
thereof,  and  they  shall,  within  fifteen  (15)  days  from  the  re- 
ceipt of  such  notice,  meet  to  examine  such  person,  or  persons,, 
and  give  him,  her,  or  them,  proper  notice  of  such  meeting. 

Sec.  8.  That  this  Act  shall  not  apply  to  any  one  now 
practicing  who  is  the  owner  of,  and  purchased,  real  estate  in 
the  State,  previous  to  the  passage  of  this  Act. 

Sec  9.  That  this  Act  shall  take  effect  from  the  date  of 
its  passage. 


FLORIDA. 


Following  is  the  text  of  An  Act  to  Amend  an  Act  entitled  "An 
Act  to  Provide  for  the  Appointment  of  a  Board  of  Exam- 
iners and  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Florida,  the  same  being  Chapter  3711  of  the 
Laws  of  Florida,  approved  June  7th,  1887." 

Section.  1.  Re  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature,  of  the  State 
of  Florida,  That  section  three  (3)  of  an  Act  entitled  "An 
Act  to  provide  for  the  appointment  of  a  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers and  to  regulate  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Florida,  the  same  being  Chapter  3711  of  the  Laws 
of  Florida,  approved  June  7th,  1887,"  be  amended  so  as  to 
read  as  follows : 

"  Sec.  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  First, 
to  meet  annually  at  the  call  of  three  (3)  members  of  said 
board ;  thirty  (30)  days'  notice  shall  be  given  of  the  annual 


228  APPENDIX. 

meeting.  Secondly,  to  grant  certificates  to  all  applicants 
who  have  obtained  a  diploma  from  a  reputable  dental  college 
and  who  pass  a  satisfactory  examination.  Thirdly,  to  keep  a 
book  in  which  shall  be  registered  the  names  of  all  persons 
licensed  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Florida. 
Fourthly,  for  which  examination  and  certificate  the  board 
shall  be  entitled  to  receive  a  fee  of  ten  (10)  dollars  to 
defray  the  expenses  of  holding  the  meetings." 

Sec.  2.  All  laws  and  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  are 
hereby  repealed. 

Sec  3.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately  upon 
the  approval  of  the  Governor. 

Approved  May  25th,  1891. 


GEORGIA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  to  Protect  the 
People  against  Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State 
of  Georgia. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  That 
from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act  it  shall  be  unlawful 
for  any  person  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Georgia,  unless  said  person  has  graduated  and  re- 
ceived a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  dental  college  char- 
tered under  the  authority  of  some  one  of  the  United  States  or 
foreign  governments,  or  shall  have  obtained  a  license  from  a 
Board  of  Dentists  duly  authorized  and  appointed  by  this  Act 
to  issue  such  license. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  consist  of 
five  (5)  dental  graduates  or  practitioners  of  dentistry,  who  are 
members  in  good  standing  of  the  Georgia  State  Dental  Soci- 
ety ;  provided,  that  said  graduates  or  practitioners  have  been 
practicing  in  the  State  of  Georgia  for  a  term  of  not  less  than 
three  (3)  years.  Said  board  shall  be  elected  to  serve  for  two 
years.     The  President  of  said  Georgia  State  Dental  Society 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  229 

shall  have  power  to  fill  all  vacancies  in  said  board  for  unex- 
pired terms. 

Sec.  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  First, 
to  meet  annually  at  the  time  of  meeting  of  the  Georgia  State 
Dental  Society,  or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  any  three  of  the 
members  of  said  board ;  thirty  days'  notice  must  be  given 
of  the  annual  meetings.  Secondly,  to  prescribe  a  course  of 
reading  for  those  who  study  dentistry  under  private  instruc- 
tion. Thirdly,  to  grant  a  license  to  any  applicant  who  shall 
furnish  satisfactory  evidence  of  having  graduated  and  re. 
ceived  a  diploma  from  any  incorporated  dental  college,  with- 
out fee,  charge,  or  examination.  Fourthly,  to  grant  license 
to  all  other  applicants  who  undergo  a  satisfactory  examina- 
tion. Fifthly,  to  keep  a  book  in  which  shall  be  registered 
the  names  of  all  persons  licensed  to  practice  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Georgia. 

Sec  4.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has  it 
in  keeping,  with  the  common  seal,  shall  be  evidence  in  any 
court  in  the  State. 

Sec  5.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  consti- 
tute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business ;  and  should  a 
quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  their  meeting, 
those  present  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day  until  a  quorum  is 
present. 

Sec  6.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
license  to  an  applicant  to  practice  until  the  next  regular  meet- 
ing of  the  board,  when  he  shall  report  the  fact,  at  which 
time  the  temporary  license  shall  expire  ;  but  such  temporary 
license  shall  not  be  granted  by  a  member  of  the  board  after 
the  board  has  rejected  the  applicant. 

Sec  7.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this 
Act,  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Georgia  for  a  fee  or 
reward,  shall  be  liable  to  indictment,  and,  on  conviction,  shall 
be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dol- 
lars ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed 
t'>  prevent  any  person  from  extracting  teeth;  and  provided 


230  APPENDIX. 

further,  that  none  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  apply 
to  regularly  licensed  physicians  and  surgeons. 

Sec.  8.  That  on  trial  of  such  indictment,  it  shall  be  in- 
cumbent on  the  defendant  to  show  that  he  has  authority, 
under  the  law,  to  practice  dentistry,  to  exempt  himself  from 
such  penalty. 

Sec.  9.  That  one-half  of  all  tines  collected  shall  inure 
to  the  informer,  and  the  other  half  to  the  educational  fund 
of  the  county. 

Sec.  10.  That  dentists  who  have  been  in  practice  prior 
to  the  passage  of  this  Act  are  exempt  from  all  provisions  of 
the  same. 

Sec  11.  Repeals  conflicting  laws. 

Approved  August  24th,  1872. 

An  amendment  was  passed  and  approved  October  9th, 
1885,  of  which  the  following  is  the  text: 

GEORGIA    AMENDMENT. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  That 
from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  unlawful 
for  any  person  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Georgia,  unless  said  person  shall  have  obtained  a  li- 
cense from  a  Board  of  Dentists,  duly  authorized  and  appointed 
under  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  to  issue  license. 

Sec  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  consist  of 
five  (5)  dental  graduates  or  practitioners  of  dentistry,  who 
are  members  in  good  standing  of  the  Georgia  State  Dental 
Society  ;  provided,  that  said  graduates  or  practitioners  have 
been  practicing  in  the  State  of  Georgia  for  a  term  of  not 
less  than  three  (3)  years.  Said  board  shall  be  elected  to 
serve  for  two  years.  The  President  of  said  Georgia  State 
Dental  Society  shall  have  power  to  fill  all  vacancies  in  said 
board  for  unexpired  terms. 

Sec  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  First, 
to  meet  annually  at  the  time  of  meeting  of  the  Georgia 
State  Dental  Society,  or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  any  three 
members  of  said  board  ;  thirty  days'  notice  must  be  given 
of  the  annual  meetings.     Secondly,  to  prescribe  a  course  of 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  231 

reading  for  those  who  study  dentistry  under  private  instruc- 
tion. Thirdly,  to  grant  license  to  all  applicants  who  undergo  a 
satisfactory  examination.  Fourthly,  to  keep  a  book,  in  which 
shall  be  registered  the  names  of  al1.  persons  licensed  to  practice, 
dentistry  in  the  State  of  Georgia. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has 
it  in  keeping,  with  the  common  seal,  shall  be  evidence  in  any 
court  in  the  State. 

Sec.  5.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  con- 
stitute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  should 
a  quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  their 
meeting,  those  present  may  adjourn  from  da}*  to  day  until  a 
quorum  is  present. 

Sec  6.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
license  to  an  applicant  to  practice  until  the  next  regular 
meeting  of  the  board,  when  he  shall  report  the  fact,  at 
which  time  the  temporary  license  shall  expire;  but  such  tem- 
porary license  shall  not  be  granted  by  a  member  of  the  board 
after  the  board  has  rejected  the  applicant. 

Approved,  as  amended,  October  9th,  1885. 

[See  Code  of  Georgia,  §1416.] 

An  Act  to  amend  Section  14-16  of  the  Code  of  Georgia  Relat- 
ing to  and  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State 
of  Georgia,  and  to  Require  Practicing  Dentists  to  Register. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  That 
section  1416  of  the  Code  of  Georgia  be  so  amended  as  to 
read,  as  follows  :  "  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation 
of  this  Act,  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Georgia  for  a 
fee  or  reward,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and, 
upon  conviction,  shall  be  punished  as  prescribed  in  section 
4:>10  of  the  Code  of  1873 ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this 
Act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  any  person  from  extracting 
teeth ;  and  provided  further,  that  none  of  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  shall  apply  to  regular  licensed  physicians  and  sur- 
geons in  practice  at  or  prior  to  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and 


232  APPENDIX. 

dentists  who  were  in  practice  prior  to  the  24th  of  August,, 
1872."' 

Sec.  2.  Every  person  practicing  dentistry  in  this  State- 
shall,  within  sixty  days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  register 
his  name,  together  with  his  post-office  address,  and  the  date  of 
his  diploma  or  license,  in  the  office  of  the  Clerk  of  the  Su- 
perior Court  of  the  county  in  which  he  practices,  and  shall,. 
on  the  payment  to  such  Clerk  of  a  fee  of  fifty  cents,  be  en- 
titled to  receive  from  him  a  certificate  of  such  registration. 

Sec.  3.  That  all  laws  and  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  with 
this  Act  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  repealed. 

Approved  October  20th,  1879. 

An  Act  to  Exempt  all  Regular  Practicing  Dentists  from  Jury 

Duty. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  That 
from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  all  dentists  who  are 
in  regular  practice  in  this  State,  shall  be  exempt  from  all 
jury  duty. 

Sec.  2.  That  all  laws  and  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  with 
this  Act  are  hereby  repealed. 

Passed  August,  1881. 


ILLINOIS. 


A  Bill  for  An  Act  to  Insure  the  Better  Education  of  Practition- 
ers of  Dental  Surgery,  and  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of 
Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Illinois. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  people  of  the  State  of  Illinois, 
represented  in  the  General  Assembly,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful 
for  any  person,  who  is  not  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this 
Act  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  to  com- 
mence such  practice,  unless  such  person  shall  have  received  a 
diploma  from  the  faculty  of  some  reputable  dental  college^ 
duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of  this  State  or  of  some  other  of 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  233 

the  United  States,  or  by  the  laws  of  some  foreign  country,  in 
which  college  or  colleges  there  was,  at  the  time  of  the  issue 
of  such  diploma,  annually  delivered,  a  full  course  of  lectures 
and  instructions  in  dental  surgery  ;  provided,  that  any  per- 
son removing  into  this  State,  who  shall  have  been  for  a 
period  of  ten  years  prior  to  such  removal,  a  practicing  den- 
tist; and  provided  also,  that  any  person  holding  the  diploma 
of  Doctor  of  Medicine  from  any  reputable  medical  college, 
shall  be  entitled  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  upon  ob- 
taining a  license  for  the  purpose  as  hereinafter  provided  ; 
and  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  any 
physician  or  surgeon  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  prac- 
ticing dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to 
carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provision  of  this  Act. 
The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed  by  the 
Governor.  The  term  for  which  the  members  of  said  board 
shall  hold  their  offices  shall  be  rive  years,  except  that  the 
members  of  the  board  first  to  be  appointed  under  this  Act 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  one,  two,  three,  four, 
and  five  years,  respectively,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be 
duly  appointed.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board, 
such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor. 

Sec  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members 
President  and  one  the  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet, 
at  least,  once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener,  and  at  such 
times  and  places,  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A  majority  of 
said  board  shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the 
proceedings  thereof  shall  at  all  reasonable  times  be  open  to 
public  inspection. 

Sec  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  within  six 
months  from  the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  cause 
his  or  her  name  and  residence,  or  place  of  business,  to  be 
registered  with  said  Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall  keep  a 
book  for  that  purpose ;  and  every  person  who  shall  so 
register   with    said    board    as   a   practitioner  of  dentistry, 


234  APPENDIX. 

may  continue  to  practice  the  same,  as  such,  without  incur- 
ring any  of  the  liabilities  or  penalties  provided  in  this  Act. 

Sec.  5.  No  person  whose  name  is  not  registered  on  the 
books  of  said  board  as  a  regular  practitioner  of  dentistry, 
within  the  time  prescribed  in  the  preceding  section,  shall  be 
permitted  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  until  such 
person  shall  have  been  duly  examined  by  said  board  and 
regularly  licensed  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
Act. 

Sec.  6.  Any  and  all  persons  who  shall  so  desire  may 
appear  before  said  board,  at  any  of  its  regularly  meetings, 
and  be  examined  with  reference  to  their  knowlege  and  skill 
in  dental  surgery,  and,  if  the  examination  of  any  such 
person  or  persons  shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board, 
the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons,  as  they 
shall  find  from  such  examination  to  possess  the  requisite 
qualifications,  a  license  to  practice  dentistry  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  But  said  board  shall  at 
all  times  issue  a  license  to  any  regular  graduate  of  any 
reputable  dental  college  without  examination,  upon  the 
payment  by  such  graduate  to  the  said  board  of  a  fee  of  one 
dollar.  All  licenses  issued  by  said  board  shall  be  signed  by  the 
members  thereof  and  be  attested  by  its  President  and  Secre- 
tary ;  and  such  license  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of  the 
right  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of 
Illinois. 

Sec.  7.  Any  member  of  said  board  may  issue  a  tempo- 
rary license  to  any  applicant,  upon  the  presentation  by  such 
applicant  of  the  evidence  of  the  necessary  qualifications  to 
practice  dentistry,  and  such  temporary  license  shall  remain 
in  force  until  the  next  regular  meeting  of  said  board  occur- 
ring after  the  date  of  such  temporary  license,  and  no  longer. 

Sec  8.  Any  person  v7ho  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act  shall  be  liable  to  prosecution  before  any 
court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  upon  information  or  by 
indictment,  and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than 
twenty-five  dollars,  nor  more  than  fifty  dollars,  for  each  and 
every  offence.     All  fines  recovered  under  this  Act  shall  be 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  235 

paid  into  the  common  school  fund  of  the  county  in  which 
such  conviction  takes  place. 

"Sec.  9.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  maintaining  the  provision  of  this  Act,  the  said  Board 
of  Examiners  may  charge  each  person  applying  to  or 
appearing  before  them  for  examination  for  license  to  prac- 
tice dentistry,  a  fee  of  two  dollars,  and  out  of  the  funds 
coming  into  the  possession  of  the  board  from  the  fees  so 
-charged,  the  members  of  said  board  may  receive,  as  com- 
pensation, the  sum  of  five  dollars  for  each  day  actually 
engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office,  and  all  legitimate  and 
necessary  expenses  incurred  in  attending  the  meetings  of  said 
board.  Said  expenses  shall  be  paid  from  the  fees  and  penal- 
ties received  by  the  Board  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 
And  no  part  of  the  salary  or  other  expenses  of  the  Board 
shall  ever  be  paid  out  of  the  State  treasury.  All  moneys 
received  in  excess  of  said  per  diem  allowance,  and  other 
expenses  above  provided  for,  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary 
of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  the  expenses  of 
said  board,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board  shall  from 
time  to  time  direct.  And  said  board  shall  make  an  annual 
report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor,  by  the  fifteenth 
-of  December  of  each  year,  together  with  an  account  of  all 
moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them,  pursuant  to  this  Act. 

Sec.  10.  Any  person  who  shall  be  licensed  by  said 
board  to  practice  dentistry,  shall  cause  his  or  her  license  to 
be  registered  with  the  County  Clerk  of  any  county  or  coun- 
ties in  which  such  person  may  desire  to  engage  in  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry,  and  the  County  Clerks  of  the  several  coun- 
ties in  this  State  shall  charge  for  registering  such  license  a 
fee  of  twenty-five  cents  for  each  registration.  Any  fail- 
ure, neglect,  or  refusal  on  the  part  of  any  person  hold- 
ing such  license  to  register  the  same  with  the  County 
Clerk,  as  above  directed,  for  a  period  of  six  months,  shall 
work  a  forfeiture  of  the  license,  and  no  license,  when  once 
forfeited,  shall  be  restored,  except  upon  the  payment  to  the 
said  Board  of  Examiners  of  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars, 
as  a  penalty  for  such  neglect,  failure,  or  refusal. 


236  APPENDIX. 

INDIANA. 

An  Act  to  JRegn/<if<    tfo    Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of 

Indiana. 

Section  1.  lie  it  enacted  by  the  (Heneral  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Indiana,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  one  to 
practice  dentistry  for  a  fee,  or  reward,  in  the  State  of  Indi- 
ana, without  having  received  a  diploma  from  a  dental  col- 
lege, duly  incorporated,  under  the  laws  of  this  or  some  other 
State  of  the  United  States,  or  a  certificate  of  qualification 
issued  by  a  Board  of  Examiners,  to  be  appointed  by  the  In- 
diana State  Dental  Association ;  provided,  that  nothing  in 
this  Act  shall  apply  to  any  one  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  consisting  of  five  prac- 
ticing dentists,  shall  be  appointed  by  the  said  State  Dental 
Association,  according  to  its  by-laws,  whose  duty  it  shall 
be  to  meet  annually,  at  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  said 
State  Association,  or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  three  members  of 
said  board,  at  such  time  and  place  as  may  be  designated  in 
said  call,  and  to  examine  all  applicants  and  issue  certificates 
to  all  who  pass  a  satisfactory  examination. 

Sec  3.  Any  applicant  who  furnishes  satisfactory  proof 
of  having  been  engaged  in  a  reputable  practice  of  dentistry 
for  ten  consecutive  years,  immediately  preceding  the  time  of 
their  application,  shall  be  examined  only  in  practical  den- 
tistry, operative  and  mechanical ;  all  others  shall  be  exam- 
ined in  anatomy,  physiology,  pathology,  therapeutics,  chem- 
istry and  the  theory  and  practice  of  surgical  and  mechanical 
dentistry. 

Sec.  4.  All  certificates,  issued  under  the  provisions  of 
this  Act,  shall  be  signed  by  all  the  members  of  said  Board 
of  Examiners,  and  have  the  seal  of  the  Indiana  State  Dental 
Association  affixed,  and  shall  be  -prima  facie  evidence  of  the 
right  of  the  holder  to  practice  under  this  Act,  which  right 
it  shall  be  incumbent  upon  the  holder  to  prove  in  all  prosecu- 
tions under  the  same. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  237 

Sec.  5.  Any  member  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  may- 
grant  a  permit  to  practice  until  the  next  meeting  of  the 
board,  but  such  permit  shall  be  valid  only  until  said  next 
meeting,  and  in  no  case  be  extended  or  renewed. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  violating  the  provisions  of  this  Act 
shall  be  liable  to  prosecution  upon  complaint  of  any  citizen 
of  this  State  before  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  or  in  any  court 
of  competent  jurisdiction,  by  indictment,  or  information,  in 
the  county  where  the  offense  is  committed,  and,  upon  con- 
viction, shall  be  lined  in  any  sum  not  less  than  fifty  dollars, 
nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  for  each  offence ;  'pro- 
vided, nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  pre- 
vent physicians  or  surgeons  extracting  teeth  ;  and  all  fines  so 
collected  shall  belong  to  the  common  school  fund  of  the 
county  where  assessed. 

Sec  7.  To  provide  a  fund  to  carry  out  and  enforce  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall,  before 
examination,  collect  from  each  applicant  the  sum  of  twenty- 
five  dollars ;  any  portion  of  which  there  may  be  remaining, 
after  paying  necessary  expenses  attending  such  examinations, 
shall  be  paid  into  the  treasury  of  the  said  State  Association, 
to  be  used  for  the  purpose  for  which  said  fund  is  hereby 
created. 

Sec  8.  Three  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners 
shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and  all  questions  before  them  shall 
be  decided  by  a  vote  of  the  majority  of  those  present,  and, 
should  there  not  be  a  quorum  present  on  the  day  of  meeting, 
those  present  may  meet  and  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until 
there  is  a  quorum  present. 

Sec  9.  The  board  shall  receive,  out  of  the  fund  created 
by  this  Act,  such  compensation  for  their  services  as  the 
By-Laws  of  said  State  Dental  Association  may  provide. 

Sec  10.  This  Act  shall  be  in  force  from  and  after  its 
passage,  publication  and  circulation  in  the  several  counties  of 
the  State. 

Approved  March  29th,  1879. 


238  APPENDIX. 

I  X 1 I I A  X  A    A  M  E  X  DM  E  X  T . 

The  Legislature  of  Indiana  has  passed  a  new  Act  for 
the  regulation  of  dentistry  in  that  State.  The  new  law,  the 
text  of  which  will  be  found  below,  went  into  effect  the  last 
Tuesday  (28th)  of  June,  1887. 

Section  1.  Be  it  evaded  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Indiana,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  one  to 
practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Indiana  at  any  time  after 
thirty  days  from  the  appointment  of  the  Board  of  Examiners 
provided  for  in  section  2  hereof,  without  being  registered 
according  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  consisting  of  five  repu- 
table practicing  dentists,  shall  be  appointed  on  the  last  Tues- 
day of  June,  1887,  and  biennially  thereafter,  one  by  the 
Governor,  one  by  the  State  Board  of  Health,  and  three  by 
the  Indiana  State  Dental  Association  ;  said  board  to  serve  for 
the  term  of  two  years  from  the  date  of  such  appointment ; 
and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  board  to  meet  annually,  at 
the  time  and  place  fixed  for  the  meeting  of  said  Dental  Asm  >- 
ciation,  or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  any  three  members  of  said 
board,  at  such  time  and  place  as  may  be  designated  in  such 
call.  When  convened,  the  said  board  shall  examine  all  ap- 
plications for  certificates  of  qualification,  and  issue  such  cer- 
tificates to  all  such  applicants  as  shall  pass  a  satisfactory 
examination. 

Sec  3.  Any  person  who  shall  prove  to  the  satisfaction 
of  said  Board  of  Examiners  that  he  is  a  graduate  of  a  dental 
college  duly  and  legally  incorporated,  and  who  shall  present 
a  diploma  therefrom,  and  shall  further  show  that  said  college 
is  of  good  repute,  shall  be  entitled  to  a  registration  certificate 
on  the  payment  of  a  fee  of  one  dollar  to  said  board. 

Sec  4.  Any  person  who  shall  present  to  the  said  Board 
of  Examiners  a  valid  certificate  of  qualification,  issued  by 
the  Board  of  Examiners  under  the  provision  of  any  former 
law  of  this  State,  shall  be  entitled  to  a  certificate  of  registra- 
tion upon  the  payment  of  a  fee  of  one  dollar  to  said  board. 

Sec  5.  Any  person  who  shall  file  before  said  Board  of 
Examiners  an  application  under  oath,  and  sworn  to  by  one 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  239 

or  more  freeholders,  setting  forth  the  fact  that  said  applicant 
has  been  engaged  in  the  lawful  practice  of  dentistry  in  this 
State  continuously  since  the  29th  day  of  May,  1879. 
Approved  May  31st,  1879. 


IOWA. 

A  Bill  for  an  Act    to  Insure  the  Better  Education  of  Prac- 
titioners of  Dentistry  in  the  Slate  of  Iowa. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  loica,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  who 
is  not,  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State.,  to  commence  such  prac- 
tice, unless  such  person  shall  have  received  a  license  from 
the  Board  of  Examiners,  or  some  member  thereof,  as  here- 
inafter provided,  or  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  some 
reputable  dental  college,  duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of  the 
State,  or  by  some  other  of  the  United  States,  or  by  the  laws 
of  some  foreign  country,  in  which  college  or  colleges  there 
was,  at  the  time  of  the  issue  of  such  diplomas,  annually  de- 
livered, a  full  course  of  lectures  and  instruction  in  dental 
surgery. 

Sec  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners  is  hereby  created,  whose 
duty  it  shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purpose  and  enforce  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act.  The  members  of  such  board  shall  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor,  and  shall  consist  of  five  practicing 
dentists,  \\  ho  shall  have  been  engaged  in  the  continuous- 
practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  for  five  years,  or  over,  at 
the  time  of,  or  prior  to,  the  passage  of  this  Act.  The  term 
tor  which  the  members  of  -aid  board  shall  hold  their  offices, 
shall  be  five  years,  except  that  the  members  of  the  board  first 
appointed  under  tliis  Act,  shall  hold  their  office  for  the  term 
of  one,  two,  three,  four  and  five  years,  respectively,  and  un- 
til their  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed.  In  case  of  va- 
cancy occurring  in  said  board,  such  vacancy  shall  he  filled 
by  the  Governor. 


240  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  •">.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members  Presi- 
dent, and  one  the  Secretary  thereof;  and  it  shall  meet  at 
least  once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener,  and  at  such 
time  and   place,  as  it  may  deem  necessary.     A  majority  of 

said  board  shall,  at  all  times,  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the 
proceedings  thereof  shall, at  all  reasonable  times,  he  open  to 
public  inspection. 

Sec  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  en- 
gaged in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State,  within  six 
months  from  the  date  of  the  taking  effect  of  this  Act,  to  cause 
his  or  her  name  and  residence,  or  place  of  business,  to  be  regis- 
tered with  the  said  Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall  keep  a 
book  for  that  purpose  ;  and  every  person  who  shall  so  regis- 
ter with  said  board  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry,  may  con- 
tinue to  practice  the  same  as  such  without  incurring  any  of 
the  liabilities  or  penalties  of  this  Act. 

Sec  5.  No  person,  whose  name  is  not  registered  on  the 
books  of  said  board  as  a  regular  practitioner  of  dentistry, 
within  the  limits  prescribed  in  the  preceding  section,  shall  be 
permitted  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State  until  such  per- 
son shall  have  been  duly  examined  by  said  board,  and  regu- 
larly licensed  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec  6.  Any  and  all  persons,  who  sball  so  desire,  may 
appear  before  said  board,  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and 
be  examined  with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in 
dental  surgery,  and  if  such  person  shall  be  found,  after  hav- 
ing been  so  examined,  to  possess  the  requisite  qualifications, 
said  board  shall  issue  a  license  to  such  person  to  practice 
dentistry,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  But 
said  board  shall,  at  all  times,  issue  a  license  to  any  regular 
graduate  of  any  reputable  dental  college,  without  examina- 
tion, upon  the  payment  by  such  graduate  to  the  said  board 
of  a  fee  of  one  dollar.  All  licenses  issued  by  said  board  shall 
be  signed  by  the  members  thereof,  and  be  attested  by  its 
President  and  Secretary ;  and  such  licenses  shall  be  prima 
facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  Iowa. 

Sec  7.  Any  member  of  said  board  may  issue  a  tempo- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  "241 

rary  license  to  any  applicant,  upon  the  presentation  by  such 
applicant  of  the  evidence  of  the  necessary  qualification  to 
practice  dentistry ;  and  such  temporary  license  shall  remain 
in  force  until  the  next  regular  meeting  of  said  board 
occurring  after  the  date  of  such  temporary  license,  and  no 
longer. 

Sec.  8.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act  shall  be  liable  to  prosecution  before  any 
court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  upon  information;  and, upon 
■conviction,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars, 
nor  more  than  fifty  dollars  for  each  and  every  offense. 

Sec.  9.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  maintaining  the  provision  of  this  Act,  the  said  Board  of 
Examiners  may  charge  each  person,  applying  to,  or  appear- 
ing before  them  for  examination  for  license  to  practice  den- 
tistry, a  fee  of  two  dollars ;  and  out  of  the  funds  coming 
into  the  possession  of  the  board  from  the  fee  so  charged,  the 
members  of  said  board  may  receive,  as  compensation,  the 
sum  of  five  dollars  for  each  day  actually  engaged  in  the 
duties  of  their  office.  And  no  part  of  the  salary,  or  other 
•expenses  of  the  board  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  State  Treas- 
ury. All  moneys  received  in  excess  of  the  said  per  diem  al- 
lowance shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary  of  said  board  as  a 
special  fund  for  meeting  the  expenses  of  said  board,  he  giv- 
ing such  bond  as  the  board  shall,  from  time  to  time,  direct. 
The  said  board  shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its  proceed- 
ings to  the  Governor,  by  the  fifteenth  of  November  of  each 
year,  together  with  an  account  of  all  moneys  received  and 
disbursed  by  them,  pursuant  to  this  Act. 

Sec.  10.  Any  person  who  shall  be  licensed  by  said  board 
to  practice  dentistry,  shall  cause  his  or  her  license  to  be  regis- 
tered with  the  County  Clerk  of  any  county,  or  counties,  in 
which  such  person  may  desire  to  engage  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  ;  and  the  County  Clerks  of  the  several  counties  in 
the  State  shall  charge  for  registering  such  license,  the  fee  of 
twenty-five  cents  for  each  registration.  Any  failure,  neglect, 
or  refusal  on  the  part  of  any  person  holding  such  licenses  to 
register  the  same  with  the  County  Clerk,  as  above  directed, 


24l'  appendix. 

for  a  period  of  six  months,  shall  work  a  forfeiture  of  the 
license;  and  no  license,  when  once  forfeited,  shall  be  restored, 
except  upon  the  payment  to  the  said  Board  of  Examiners 
the  sum  of  twenty-live  dollars,  as  a  penalty  for  such  neglect, 
failure,  or  refusal. 

Sec.  11.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  [ire- 
vent  persons  from  extracting  teeth. 

Approved  March  2nd,  1882. 


KANSAS. 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  and  Punish  Viola- 
tors thereof  in  Kansas. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State 
of  KansasJThnt  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  prac- 
tice, or  attempt  to  practice,  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the 
State  of  Kansas,  without  first  having  received  a  diploma  from 
the  faculty  of  some  reputable  dental  college,  school,  or  uni- 
versity department,  duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of  this  State 
or  some  other  of  the  United  States,  or  by  the  laws  of  some 
foreign  government,  and  in  which  college,  school  or  univer- 
sity department  there  was,  at  the  time  of  the  issuance  of  such 
diploma,  annually  delivered  a  full  course  of  lectures  and  in- 
structions in  dentistry  and  dental  surgery  ;  provided,  that 
nothing  in  section  1  of  this  Act  shall  apply  to  any  person  en- 
gaged in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this 
State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  except  as  here- 
inafter provided  ;  and  provided  further,  that  nothing  in  this 
Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  physicians,  surgeons 
and  others  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  consisting  of  four  prac- 
ticing dentists,  residents  of  this  State,  is  hereby  created,  who 
shall  have  authority  to  issue  certificates  to  persons  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this  State  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  also  to  decide  upon  the 


I>ENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  243 

validity  of  such  diplomas  as  ma}7  be  subsequently  presented 
for  registration,  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Sec.  3.  The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed 
by  the  Governor,  and  shall  serve  for  a  term  of  four  years,  ex- 
cepting that  the  members  of  the  board  first  appointed  shall 
hold  their  offices,  as  follows :  Two  for  two,  and  two  for  four 
years,  respectively,  and  until  their  successors  are  duly  ap- 
pointed. In  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such 
vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  appointment  by  the  Governor. 

Sec.  4.  Said  board  shall  keep  a  record,  in  which  shall 
be  registered  the  names  and  residences,  or  places  of  business,  of 
all  persons  authorized  under  this  Act  to  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  in  this  State.  It  shall  elect  one  of  its  mem- 
bers President  and  one  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet 
at  least  once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener,  and  at  such 
times  and  places,  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A  majority  of 
the  members  of  said  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and 
the  proceedings  thereof  shall  be  at  all  times  open  for  public 
inspection. 

Sec.  5.  Every  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry or  dental  surgery  within  this  State  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  within  six  months  thereafter,  cause 
his  or  her  name,  and  residence,  and  place  of  business,  to  be 
registered  with  said  Board  of  Examiners ;  upon  which  said 
board  shall  issue  to  such  person  a  certificate  duly  signed  by 
a  majority  of  the  members  of  said  board,  and  which  certifi- 
cate shall  entitle  the  person  to  whom  it  is  issued,  to  all  the 
rights  and  privileges  set  forth  in  section  1  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  desiring  to  commence  the  practice 
of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  within  this  State,  after  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  before  commencing  such  practice, 
file  for  record  in  a  book  kept  for  such  purpose,  with  said 
Board  of  Examiners,  his  or  her  diploma,  or  a  duly  authenti- 
cated copy  thereof,  the  validity  of  which  said  board  shall 
have  the  power  to  determine.  If  accepted,  said  board  shall 
issue  to  the  person  holding  such  diploma  a  certificate  duly 
signed  by  all,  or  a  majority,  of  the  members  of  said  board, 
and  which  certifk-ate  shall  entitle  the  person  to  whom  it  is 


l244  APPENDIX. 

issued  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  set  forth  in  section  1 
of  this  Act. 

Sec.  7.  To  provide  for  the  proper  and  effective  enforce- 
ment of  this  Act,  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  entitled 
to  the  following  fees,  to  wit :  For  each  certificate  issued  to 
persons  in  practice  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of 
this  Act, the  sum  of  three  dollars;  for  each  certificate  issued 
to  persons  not  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this 
State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  the  sum  of  ten 
dollars. 

Sec.  8.  That  members  of  said  board  shall  each  receive 
the  compensation  of  five  dollars  per  day,  for  each  day  actu- 
ally engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office,  which,  together 
with  all  other  legitimate  expenses  incurred  in  the  perform- 
ance of  such  duties,  shall  be  paid  from  fees  received  by  the 
board  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act ;  and  no  part  of  the 
expenses  of  said  board  shall  at  any  time  be  paid  out  of  the 
State  Treasury.  All  moneys  in  excess  of  said  per  diem  al- 
lowance, and  other  expenses,  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary 
of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  the  expenses'  of 
said  Board,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board  shall,  from 
time  to  time,  direct ;  and  such  board  shall  make  an  annual 
report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the  fifteenth  day 
of  December  of  each  year,  together  with  an  account  of  all 
moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them  in  pursuance  of  this 
Act. 

Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  this  Act  by  prac- 
ticing, or  attempting  to  practice,  dentistry  within  the  State 
without  first  complying  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall 
be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction 
thereof,  shall  be  fined  in  a  sum  not  less  than  ten  dollars, 
nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars. 

Sec  10.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  publication  in  the  statutes. 

Approved  February  25th,  1885. 

Took  effect  May  1st,  1885. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  245 

KENTUCKY. 

LAWS  RELATING  TO  DENTISTS. 

An  Act  to  amend  an  Act,  entitled  "An  Act  to  Incorporate  the 
State  Dental  Association.'''' 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Commonwealth  of  Kentucky,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any 
person  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Kentucky  for 
compensation,  unless  such  person  has  received  a  diploma  from 
the  faculty  of  a  dental  college,  duly  incorporated  under  the 
laws  of  this  or  any  other  of  the  United  States,  or  foreign 
country,  or  a  certificate  of  qualification  issued  by  the  Ken- 
tucky State  Dental  Association  ;  provided,  that  nothing  in 
this  section  shall  apply  to  persons  now  engaged  in  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec.  2.  There  shall  be  a  Board  of  Examiners,  to  con- 
sist of  three  practitioners  of  dentistry,  who,  together  with 
the  President  and  Secretary  of  the  Kentucky  Dental  Associ- 
ation, shall  be  elected  by  said  Dental  Association,  according 
to  its  By-Laws. 

Sec.  3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Board  of  Exam- 
iners, so  elected,  to  meet  annually  at  the  time  of  meeting  of 
said  Kentucky  State  Dental  Association,  or  oftener,  at  the 
call  of  any  three  of  the  members  of  said  board,  or  of  an  ap- 
plicant for  a  certificate  to  practice  dentistry. 

Sec  4.  Thirty  days'  notice  must  be  given  of  the  annual 
meetings  of  said  State  Association,  and  previous  thereto ;  that 
all  applicants  for  certificates  to  practice  dentistry  will  be 
granted  the  same  upon  satisfactory  examination. 

Sec  5.  The  Kentucky  State  Dental  Association  shall 
cause  to  be  kept  a  book,  in  which  shall  be  registered  the 
names  of  all  persons  having  certificates  to  practice  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  Kentucky,  and  that  the  book,  or  books,  so 
kept  shall  be  a  book,  or  books, of  record,  and  a  transcript  from 
the  same,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has  it  in  charge, 
with  the  seal  of  said  association  affixed  thereto,  shall  be  evi- 
dence in  any  court  in  this  Commonwealth. 


24t>  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  6.  Three  members  of  sai<l  Board  of  Examiners  shall 
constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and 
should  a  quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for 
their  meeting,  those  present  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day 
until  a  quorum  is  present. 

Sec.  7.  Any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this  Aet, 
practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Kentucky,  for  a  fee  or  re- 
ward, shall  he  liable  to  indictment  by  the  grand  jury  of  the 
county  in  which  the  offense  is  committed,  and,  upon  convic- 
tion, shall  be  fined  in  the  penal  sum  of  not  less  than  fifty 
nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars  for  each  offence  ;  pro- 
vided, that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent 
physicians  or  surgeons  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec  8.  On  the  trial  of  indictments  found  as  aforesaid, 
it  shall  be  incumbent  on  the  defendant  to  show  that  he  has 
authority,  under  the  law,  to  practice  dentistry,  to  exempt 
himself  from  the  penalty  by  law  prescribed. 

Sec  9.  All  fines  collected  under  this  Act  shall  inure  to 
the  benefit  of  common  school  education,  and  be  added  to  the 
fund  of  such  common  school  in  the  county  in  which  the 
offense  is  committed. 

Sec  10.  In  order  to  provide  a  fund  to  carry  out  the 
provisions  in  the  third  section  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  to  collect  from  all  who  re- 
ceive the  certificate  to  practice  dentistry,  a  sum  not  to  ex- 
ceed twenty  dollars  each,  of  which  sum,  if  there  be  any 
remaining  after  paying  necessary  expenses,  the  balance  shall 
he  paid  into  the  treasury  of  said  Kentucky  State  Dental 
Association,  to  be  kept  as  a  fund  for  the  purpose  of  carrying 
out  more  fully  and  perfectly  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec  11.  The  Board  of  Examiners  shall  receive  such 
remuneration  for  their  services  as  the  By-Laws  of  said  Ken- 
tucky Dental  Association  may  provide. 

Sec  12.  This  Act  shall  take  effect,  and  be  in  force 
from  and  after  its  passage. 

Approved  February  6th,  1868. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  247 

LOUISIANA. 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  within  the  State 
of  Louisiana,  and  to  Protect  the  People  against  Empiricism 
in  Regard  to  the  Same. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Louisiana,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  practice  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  Louisiana,  unless  said  person  has  graduated 
and  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  dental  college, 
•chartered  under  the  authority  of  some  one  of  the  United 
States,  or  of  some  foreign  government,  or  shall  have  ob- 
tained  a  certificate  from  a  Board  of  Examining  Dentists, 
duly  authorized  by  this  Act  to  issue  such  certificate. 

Sec  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examining  Dentists  shall 
•consist  of  five  dental  graduates,  practitioners  of  dentistry, 
who  are  members  in  good  standing-  in  the  Louisiana  State 
Dental  Society,  and  have  been  practicing  in  the  State  of 
Louisiana  for  a  term  of  not  less  than  three  years.  Said 
board  shall  be  elected  by  the  State  Dental  Society  to  serve 
for  two  years.  The  President  of  the  said  Louisiana  State 
Dental  Society  shall  have  power  to  fill  all  vacancies  in  said 
board  for  unexpired  terms. 

Sec  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  First, 
to  meet,  annually,  at  the  time  of  the  meeting  of  the  Louisi- 
ana State  Dental  Society,  or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  any  three 
members  of  the  said  board,  and  after  thirty  days'  notice 
thereof.  Secondly,  to  grant  a  certificate  to  any  applicant  who 
shall  furnish  satisfactory  evidence  of  having  graduated  or 
received  a  diploma  from  any  incorporated  dental  college, 
without  fee,  charge,  or  examination.  Thirdly,  to  grant  cer- 
tificates to  all  other  applicants  who  may  undergo  a  satisfac- 
tory examination,  also  without  fee,  or  charge,  of  any  kind. 
Fourthly,  to  keep  a  book  in  which  shall  be  registered  the 
names  of  all  persons  to  whom  such  certificate  shall  be 
granted. 

Sec  4.  That  the  book,  so  kept,  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 


248  APPENDIX. 

and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has 
had  it  in  keeping,  shall  be  evidence  in  any  court  of  this 
State. 

Sec.  5.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  con- 
stitute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business;  and  should 
a  quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  of  meeting,  those 
present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until  a  quorum  be 
present. 

Sec.  6.  That  two  members  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
certificate  to  any  applicant  to  practice  until  the  next  author- 
ized meeting  of  the  board,  when  they  shall  report  the  fact, 
and  such  temporary  certificate  shall  expire ;  but  such  tempo- 
rary certificate  shall  not  be  granted  after  the  board  shall  have 
refused  a  certificate. 

Sec.  7.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this 
Act,  pretend  to  be  a  regular  practitioner  of  dentistry,  and 
practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Louisiana,  shall  be  liable  to 
indictment,  and,  on  conviction,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than 
fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dollars;  provided, 
that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  apply  to  regular  physicians 
and  surgeons. 

Sec.  8.  That  one-half  of  all  fines  collected  shall  inure 
to  the  Louisiana  State  Dental  Society,  and  the  other  half  to 
the  educational  fund  for  the  parish  in  which  the  oftense  was 
committed. 

Sec  9.  That  dentists  who  are  in  practice  in  this  State 
at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  shall  be  exempt  from 
the  provisions  made  in  the  first  section  thereof. 

Sec  10.  That  all  laws,  and  parts  of  laws,  in  conflict 
with  the  provisions  of  this  Act  be  and  the  same  are  hereby 
repealed. 

Approved  March  10th,  1880. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  249 

MAINE. 

Following  is  the  text  of  An  Act  to  Insure  the  Better  Education 
of  Practitioners  of  Dental  Surgery,  and  to  Regulate  the 
Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Maine. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, in  Legislature  assembled,  That  no  person  shall 
practice,  attempt  to  practice,  or  hold  himself  out  to  Lea  prac- 
titioner of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  until  he  or  she  shall 
have  first  received  a  certificate  as  hereinafter  provided  ;  and 
whoever  violates  the  provisions  of  this  section  shall  be  fined 
not  less  than  twenty-five  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars 
for  each  offence.  This  section  shall  take  effect  three  months 
after  the  approval  of  this  Act. 

Sec  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  den- 
tists of  good  standing,  who  have  been  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  State  not  less  than  five  years,  is  herebv 
created.  The  members  of  the  said  board  shall  be  appointed 
by  the  Governor,  with  advice  and-consentof  council,  to  hold 
office  for  the  term  of  three  years  and  until  their  successors 
are  qualified,  except,  however,  that  the  first  five  members  to 
constitute  said  board  shall  be  appointed  to  hold  as  follows, 
to-wit :  Two  for  the  term  of  one  year,  two  for  two  years,  and 
one  for  three  years.  Vacancies  in  said  board  at  any  time 
occurring  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor,  in  accordance  with 
the  provisions  of  this  section. 

Sec  3.  Before  entering  upon  their  duties  the  members 
of  said  board  shall  take  and  subscribe  the  oath  prescribed  by 
law  to  be  taken  by  other  officers  appointed  in  like  manner. 
As  soon  as  convenient  after  their  appointment,  the  members 
of  said  board  shall  meet  and  organize  by  choosing  one  of  their 
number  who  shall  serve  as  President,  and  another  as  Secretary, 
for  the  ensuing  year,  and  until  their  successors  are  chosen  ;  and 
shall  meet  annually  thereafter  at  a  time  and  place  to  be  de- 
termined by  said  board  at  its  previous  annual  meeting,  and 
may  meet  at  such  other  times  and  places  as  said  board  may 
deem  necessary.     A  majority  of  the  members  of  said  board 


250  •        APPENDIX. 

shall  constitute  a  quorum,  a  true  record  of  whose  proceed- 
ings shall  he  kept  by  the  Secretary,  and  shall  he  open  at  all 
reasonable  times  to  public  inspection.  The  Secretary,  under 
the  direction  of  the  board,  shall  further  keep  a  register  in 
which  shall  he  entered  the  name,  residence  and  place  of 
husiness  of  every  person  authorized  under  this  Act  to 
practice  dentistry,  and  shall  certify  a  copy  of  the  same  to  the 
Secretary  of  State,  who  shall  enter  the  same  in  a  hook  to 
be  kept  for  the  purpose. 

Sec.  4.  Every  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  approval  of 
this  Act  shall,  within  three  months  thereafter,  cause  his  or 
her  name,  residence  and  place  of  husiness  to  be  registered 
with  said  Board  of  Examiners.  The  statements  of  every 
such  person  shall  he  verified  under  oath  before  a  Notary 
Public  or  Justice  of  the  Peace  in  such  manner  as  may  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  board,  and,  upon  due  compliance  and  pay- 
ment of  the  fee  as  provided  in  section  7  of  this  Act,  shall 
receive  from  said  hoard  a  certificate  in  due  form,  signed  by 
the  President  and  attested  by  the  Secretary,  authorizing  such 
persons  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State. 

Sec.  5.  Any  person  desiring  to  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  in  this  State,  who  is  not  entitled  to  register 
under  the  preceding  section,  upon  first  passing  a  satisfactory 
examination  before  said  board  in  anatomy,  physiology,  pa- 
thology, therapeutics,  chemistry,  and  the  theory  and  prac- 
tice of  dentistry,  and,  on  payment  of  the  fee  as  provided  in 
section  7  of  this  Act,  shall  be  entitled  to  registration  and 
shall  receive  a  certificate  as  provided  in  section  4  of  this 
Act. 

Sec.  6.  The  Secretary  of  said  board  may  grant  a  tempo- 
rary permit  to  practice  dentistry  to  any  suitable  person  who 
shall  file  with  said  Secretary  his  application  therefor,  and 
shall  deposit  with  him  the  sum  of  ten  dollars,  to  be  applied 
toward  the  payment  of  said  applicant's  examination  fee. 
Such  permit  shall  be  valid  only  until  the  next  meeting  of 
said  board. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 


251 


Sec.  7.  The  board  shall  receive  from  the  applicant  for 
each  certificate  issued  under  section  4  of  this  Act  the  sum  of 
one  dollar ;  for  the  examination  of  each  person  under  the  pro- 
visions of  section  5,  twenty  dollars,  which  shall  in  no  case  be 
returned,  but  shall  entitle  the  applicant  to  another  examina- 
tion without  payment  of  additional  fees.  The  above  fees 
shall  be  in  full  for  all  services  and  expenses. 

Sec  8.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  constructed  as  to 
restrict  or  interfere  with  physicians  and  surgeons  in  the  dis- 
charge of  their  professional  duties,  or  with  any  citizen  in  the 
extraction  of  teeth  in  cases  of  emergency. 

Approved  March  4th,  1891. 


MARYLAND. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of 

Maryland. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of 
Maryland,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  who 
is  not,  at  the  passage  of  this  Act,  engaged  in  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  in  this  State,  to  practice  dentistry,  unless 
he  or  she  shall  have  obtained  a  certificate  as  hereinafter 
provided,  or  shall  hold  a  diploma  from  a  university  or 
college,  chartered  by,  or  under  the  laws  of  this  State, 
authorized  to  grant  diplomas  in  dental  surgery. 

Sec  2.  That  a  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five 
reputable" practicing  dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty 
if  shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act ;  the  members  of  said  board  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  Governor,  who  shall  select  them  from  the 
dentists  residing  in  this  State  ;  provided,  that  none  of  said 
board  shall  be  pecuniarily  connected  with  any  dental 
.•ollege,  or  dental  department  of  any  college,  or  univer- 
sity ;  the  term  for  which  the  members  of  said  board  shall 
hold  their  offices,  shall  be  for  four  years,  except  that  two 


252  APPENDIX. 

members  of  the  board,  first  to  be  appointed  under  this 
Act,  shall  be  designated  by  the  Governor  to  hold  their 
offices  for  the  term  of  two,  and  three,  or  four  years,  respec- 
tively, unless  sooner  removed  by  the  Governor,  and  until 
their  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed  ;  in  case  of  a 
vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such  vacancy  shall  be 
filled  in  like  manner  by  the  Governor. 

Sec.  3.  That  said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  mem- 
bers President  and  one  Secretary  thereof;  it  shall  fix  the 
time  and  place  of  its  meeting,  or  meetings ;  a  majority  of 
said  board  shall,  at  all  times,  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the 
proceedings  thereof  shall,  at  all  reasonable  times,  be  open  to 
public  inspection  ;  the  board  shall  also  make  an  annual 
report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor. 

Sec.  4.  That  within  six  months  from  the  time  this  Act 
takes  effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person,  who  is  at 
that  time  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,, 
to  cause  his  or  her  name  and  residence,  or  place  of  business, 
to  be  registered  with  said  Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall 
keep  a  book  for  that  purpose  ;  the  statement  of  every  such 
person  shall  be  verified  under  oath  before  a  Notary  Public 
or  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  such  a  manner  as  may  be  prescribed 
by  the  said  Board  of  Examiners;  every  person  who  shall  so 
register  with  said  board,  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry,  may 
continue  to  practice  the  same  as  such,  and  shall  receive  a 
certificate  of  such  registration  upon  his  or  her  paying  the 
said  board  one  dollar  for  such  certificate. 

Sec.  5.  That  any  and  all  persons -who  shall  desire  to 
commence  such  practice  may  appear  before  said  aboard  at 
any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and  be  examined  with  reference 
to  their  knowlege  and  skill  in  dental  surgery,  and  if  the 
examination  of  any  such  person,  or  persons,  shall  prove 
satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall 
issue  to  such  persons,  as  they  shall  find  to  possess  the 
requisite  qualifications,  a  certificate  to  that  effect,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  upon  the  payment  of 
one  dollar  for  such  certificate  ;  all  certificates  issued  by  said 
board  shall  be  signed  by  its  officers,  and  such  certificates 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  253 

and  diplomas  granted  as  aforesaid,  shall  be  prima  facie  evi- 
dence of  the  right  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Maryland. 

Sec  6.  That  any  person  who  shall  willfully  violate  any 
of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction  thereof  in  any  court  hav- 
ing criminal  jurisdiction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty 
dollars,  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dollars,  or  be  confined 
not  more  than  six  months  in  the  county  jail,  in  the  discre- 
tion of  the  court ;  all  fines  received  under  this  Act  shall  be 
paid  into  the  common  school  fund  of  the  city  or  county  in 
which  such  conviction  takes  place. 

Sec.  7.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  any 
certificate  provided  for  in  this  Act  to  any  applicant,  upon 
presentation  by  such  applicant  of  the  evidence  requisite  for 
the  obtaining  of  said  certificate,  which  certificate  shall  remain 
in  force  until  the  next  regular  meeting  of  the  said  board 
after  the  granting  of  said  certificate,  and  no  longer  ;  but  no 
such  certificate  shall  be  issued  by  such  members  after  such 
applicant  has  been  rejected  by  said  board. 

Sec  8.  That  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed 
as  to  interfere  with  the  rights  and  privileges  of  physicians 
and  surgeons  in  the  discharge  of  their  professional  duties. 

MARYLAND    AMENDMENT. 

The  following  are  the  amended  sections  by  the  Act  of 
1886,  chapter  372. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of 
Maryland,  That  sections  one  and  eight  of  the  Act  passed  at 
the  January  session,  eighteen  hundred  and  eighty-four, 
entitled  "  An  Act  to  insure  the  better  education  of  practi- 
tioners of  dental  surgery,  and  to  regulate  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  the  State  of  Maryland,"  be  and  the  same  is 
hereby  repealed  and  re-enacted,  so  as  to  read,  as  follows: 

"  Section  1.  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person, 
who  is  not  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act  engaged  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry,  to  practice  dentistry,  unless  he  or 


254  UTKMMX. 

she  shall  have  obtained  a  certificate  as  herein  provided,  or 

shall  hold  a  diploma  from  a  university  or  college  authorized 
to  grant  diplomas  in  dental  surgery;  any  person  holding 
such  a  diploma,  and  desiring  to  commence  such  practice, 
shall  present  the  same  to  the  Board  of  Examiners,  created  by 
this  Act,  for  approval  ;  such  Examining  Board,  being  satis- 
fied as  to  the  qualifications  of  the  applicant  and  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  diploma,  shall  indorse  the  same  as  approved,  and 
issue  the  certificate  of  registration  provided  for  in  this  Act." 

"  Sec.  8.  That  nothing  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  inter- 
fere with  the  rights  and  privileges  of  resident  physicians  and 
surgeons  in  the  discharge  of  their  professional  duties." 

Approved  April  7th,  1880. 


MASSACHUSETTS. 

An  Act  to  Establish  a  Board  of  Registration  in  Dentistry  for 
the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, in  General  Court  assembled,  and  by  the  authority 
of  the  same,  as  follows:  The  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth, 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  council,  shall  appoint, 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  five  skilled  dentists  of  good 
repute,  residing  and  doing  business  within  the  Common- 
wealth, who  shall  constitute  a  Board  of  Registration  in 
Dentistry  ;  but  no  person  shall  be  eligible  to  serve  on  said 
board,  unless  he  or  she  shall  have  been  regularly  graduated 
from  some  reputable  medical  or  dental  college  duly  author- 
ized to  grant  degrees  in  dentistry,  or  shall  have  been  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  ten 
years  previous  to  his  appointment ;  provided,  however,  that 
no  person  shall  be  eligible  to  serve  on  said  board  who  is  in 
any  way  pecuniarily  connected  with  any  dental  college  or 
dental  department  of  any  college  or  university.  The  term 
for  which  the  members  of  said  board  shall  hold  their  office, 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  255 

shall  be  three  years,  except  that  two  of  the  members  of  the 
board,  first  to  be  appointed  under  this  Act,  shall  hold  their 
office  for  the  term  of  one  year,  two  for  the  term  of  two  years, 
and  one  for  the  term  of  three  years,  respectively,  and  until 
their  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed  and  qualified.  In 
case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such  vacancy  shall 
be  filled  by  the  Governor  in  conformity  with  this  section. 
Any  member  of  said  board  may  be  removed  from  office  for 
cause  by  the  Governor,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
council. 

Sec.  2.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members  Presi- 
dent and  one  Secretary  thereof,  and  it.  shall  meet  at  least  twice 
in  each  year.  Four  of  said  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum, 
and  the  proceedings  thereof  shall,  at  all  reasonable  times,  be 
open  to  public  inspection. 

Sec.  3.  Within  six  months  from  the  time  this  Act  takes 
effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  at  that  time 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentisty  in  this  State,  to  cause  his 
or  her  name,  residence,  and  place  of  business  to  be  registered 
with  said  board,  which  shall  keep  a  book  for  that  purpose. 
The  statements  of  every  such  person  shall  be  verified  under 
oath  before  a  Notary  Public  or  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  such 
manner  as  may  be  prescribed  by  the  board.  Every  person 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  within  this  Common- 
wealth at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  who  shall 
so  register  with  said  board  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry, 
shall  receive  a  certificate  to  that  effect,  and  may  continue  to 
practice  without  incurring  any  of  the  liabilities  or  penalties 
provided  in  this  Act. 

Sec.  4.  All  persons  not  provided  for  in  section  3  may 
appear  before  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings  and 
be  examined,  either  orally  or  by  written  examination,  at 
the  option  of  the  several  applicants,  with  reference  to  their 
knowledge  and  skill  in  dentistry  and  dental  surgery;  and  if 
the  examination  of  any  such  person,  or  persons,  shall  prove 
satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  board  shall  issue  to  such  per- 
son as  it  finds  to  possess  the  requisite  qualifications  a  certifi- 
cate to  that  effect,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 


256  APPENDIX. 

Act.  All  certificates  issued  by  said  board  shall  be  signed  by 
its  officers,  and  such  certificate  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of 
the  right  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry  in  Massachusetts* 

Sec.  5.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act.  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than  titty  nor 
more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  confined  three  months  in 
the  county  jail  for  each  and  every  offense. 

Sec.  6.  The  said  board  shall  charge  each  person  receiv- 
ing a  certificate  the  sum  of  fifty  cents,  and  each  person 
appearing  before  them  for  examination  for  a  certificate  of 
qualification  a  fee  of  ten  dollars,  which  fee  shall  in  no  case 
be  returned.  Any  person  failing  to  pass  a  satisfactory  exam- 
ination shall  be  entitled  to  be  re-examined  at  any  future 
meeting  of  the  board,  free  of  charge,  but  no  applicant  shall 
be  examined  oftener  than  twice  in  one  year.  Said  board 
shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Gov- 
ernor by  the  thirty-first  day  of  December  in  each  year.  All 
fees  received  by  the  board  under  this  Act  shall  be  paid  by 
the  Secretary  of  the  board  into  the  treasury  of  the  Common- 
wealth once  in  each  month. 

Sec.  7.  The  compensation  and  all  necessary  expenses  of 
the  board  shall  be  paid  from  the  treasury  of  the  Common 
wealth.  The  compensation  of  the  board  shall  be  five  dollars 
for  every  day  actually  spent  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties, 
and  three  cents  a  mile  each  way  for  necessary  traveling  ex- 
penses in  attending  the  meetings  of  the  board ;  but  in  no 
case  shall  any  more  be  paid  than  was  actually  expended. 
Such  compensation  aud  expenses  shall  be  approved  by  the 
board,  and  sent  to  the  Auditor  of  the  Commonwealth,  who 
shall  certify  to  the  Governor  and  council  the  amounts  due, 
as  in  the  case  of  all  other  bills  and  accounts  approved  by 
him  under  the  provisions  of  the  law  ;  provided,  that  the 
amount  so  paid  shall  not  exceed  the  amount  received  by  the 
Treasurer  and  Receiver-General  of  the  Commonwealth  from 
the  board  in  fees,  as  herein  specified,  and  so  much  of  said  re- 
ceipts as  may  be  necessary  is  hereby  appropriated  from  the 
compensation  and  expenses  aforesaid. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  257 

Sec.  8.  Any  person  who  shall  falsely  claim  or  pretend 
to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  license  granted  by  any  board 
organized  under  and  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
or  who  shall  falsely,  and  with  intent  to  deceive  the  public, 
claim  or  pretend  to  be  a  graduate  from  any  incorporated 
dental  college,  or  who  shall  practice  dentistry  without 
obtaining  a  certificate  as  provided  in  this  Act,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  liable  to  the 
same  penalty  as  provided  in  section  5. 

Sec.  9.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  apply  to  any  practi- 
cing physician  who  is  a  graduate  from  the  medical  depart- 
ment of  any  incorporated  college. 

Sec.  10.  This  Act  shall  take  etfect  upon  its  passage. 

Approved  by  the  Governor  April  1st,  1887. 


MICHIGAN. 


A  Law  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of 

Michigan. 

Section  1.  That  the  people  of  the  State  of  Michigan  enact, 
That  it  shall  hereafter  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  in  the  State,  unless  such  person  has  received  a 
diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  reputable  dental  college  duly 
incorporated  under  the  laws  of  this,  or  some  other  State  of 
the  United  States,  or  a  certificate  of  qualification  from  the 
Board  of  Examiners,  provided  for  by  this  Act ;  provided, 
that  the  provisions  of  this  section  shall  in  no  way  apply  to  or 
affects  any  person  who  is  now  located  and  in  actual  practice  in 
this  State. 

Sec  2.  Said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  appointed  by 
the  Governor  of  this  State,  and  shall  consist  of  three  prac- 
tical dentists,  who  shall  be  regular  graduates  of  a  reputable 
dental  college  duly  incorporated  under  this  or  some  other 
State  of  the  United  States,  or  otherwise  possess  the  neces- 
sary qualifications  contemplated  by  this  Act. 


258  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  3.  Each  member  of  this  Board  of  Examiners  shall 
serve  for  a  term  of  three  years,  and  until  his  successor  is 
duly  appointed  and  qualified  ;  except  in  case  of  the  first 
board,  the  members  thereof  shall  serve,  respectively,  one, 
two,  and  three  years,  as  specified  in  the  appointment  of 
the  Governor. 

Sec.  4.  The  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  organized  as 
follows:  The  member  having  but  one  year  to  serve  shall 
be  President  of  the  board  ;  the  one  having  two  years  shall 
be  Treasurer,  and  the  one  having  three  years  shall  be  Secre- 
tary. The  Treasurer  shall  make  and  file  with  the  Secretary 
of  State  a  good  and  sufficient  bond  to  the  people  of  the 
State  of  Michigan,  in  the  penal  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars, 
conditioned  that  he  will  well  and  truly  pay  over  all  money* 
received  by  him  as  such  Treasurer,  in  compliance  with  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  and  otherwise  faithfully  discharge 
the  duties  of  his  office. 

Sec  5.  The  Board  of  Examiners  shall  meet,  at  least,, 
once  in  each  year,  for  the  purpose  of  examining  applicants, 
after  having  given,  personally,  or  by  mail,  thirty  days' 
written  or  printed  notice  to  each  practicing  dentist  in  the 
State,  who  has  filed  his  name  and  post-office  address  with  the 
Secretary  of  said  board.  The  said  board  is  authorized  to 
incur  all  necessary  expenses  in  the  prompt  and  efficient  dis- 
charge of  its  duties,  and  pay  the  same  with  any  moneys  in 
the  hands  of  its  Treasurer. 

Sec.  6.  Each  member  of  said  board  shall  qualify  by 
taking  the  oath  of  office  prescribed  by  the  constitution  of 
this  State,  and  filing  the  same  with  the  Secretary  of  State 
before  entering  upon  the  duties  of  his  office.  Should  a 
vacancy  occur  in  said  board,  the  Governor  of  this  State 
shall  fill  the  same  by  appointment. 

Sec  7.  Any  member  of  said  Board  of  Examiners  may, 
when  the  board  is  not  in  session,  examine  applicants,  and  in 
case  any  applicant  is  found  competent,  grant  a  license  to  him 
to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State  until  the  next  meeting  of 
the  said  board,  and  no  longer,  upon  the  payment  of  the  sum 
of  three  dollars ;  provided,  no  member  of  said  board  shall 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  259 

grant  a  license  to  one  who  has  been  rejected  on  an  examina- 
tion by  the  board. 

Sec.  8.  Should  any  member  of  said  board  be  unable 
to  attend  at  the  meeting  of  the  board  for  the  examination 
of  applicants,  he  may  appoint,  in  writing,  a  substitute,  who 
shall  have  the  same  power  on  the  examination  that  the  mem- 
ber appointing  him  would  have  if  present:  provided,  such  sub- 
stitute be  a  person  eligible  to  be  a  member  of  said  board 
within  the  provisions  of  this  Act  ;  and  provided  further, 
that  the  appointment  of  such  substitute  be  by  and  with 
the  written  consent  of  the  other  members  of  the  board. 

Sec.  9.  Each  applicant  shall,  on  the  receipt  of  a  license 
to  practice,  pay  into  the  treasury  of  the  board  the  sum  of 
ten  dollars,  which  shall  constitute  a  fund  to  defray  the  ex- 
penses of  the  board ;  and  each  member  of  the  board  shall 
receive  therefrom  the  sum  of  three  dollars  per  day  for  ser- 
vices rendered  as  such  examiner.  The  said  board  shall 
keep  a  list  of  the  names  of  all  persons  to  whom  licenses  have 
been  granted  under  the  provision  of  this  Act,  and  also  of  all 
persons  practicing  dentistry  in  this  State,  in  a  book  provided 
for  that  purpose,  with  the  names  arranged  in  alphabetical 
order. 

Sec  10.  Any  sum  in  excess  of  one  hundred  dollars 
which,  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  may  accumulate 
in  the  treasury  of  said  board,  shall  be  paid  by  the  Treasurer 
thereof  into  the  treasury  of  this  State. 

Sec  11.  Each  person  now  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  State,  shall,  within  ninety  days  after  this  Act 
takes  effect,  send  an  affidavit  to  the  Secretary  of  said  board 
setting  forth  his  name,  place  of  business,  post-office  address, 
the  length  of  time  he  has  been  engaged  in  practice  in  this 
State,  and  if  a  graduate  of  a  dental  college,  state  the  name 
of  the  same,  and  also  pay  to  the  Treasurer  of  the  said  board 
the  sum  of  twenty-five  cents,  and,  on  failure  to  comply  with 
the  provisions  of  this  section,  he  shall  be  required  to  appear 
and  be  examined  by  said  board. 

Sec  12.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  dentistry  in  this 
State    in    violation  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,   shall  be 


260  APPENDIX. 

deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction  there- 
of, shall  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars,  nor  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  sentenced  to  imprisonment  in 

the  county  jail  for  a  period  not  exceeding  ninety  days,  or 
both  such  fine  and  imprisonment,  in  the  discretion  of  the 
court;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed 
so  as  to  interfere  with  physicians  and  surgeons  in  their 
practice  as  such. 

The  above  law  went  into  effect  September  9th,  1883. 


MINNESOTA. 


An  Act  to  Insure  the  Better  Education  of  Practitioners  of  Den- 
tal Surgery,  and  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Minnesota. 

Section  1 .  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
Minnesota,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  who 
is  not  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  to  commence  such  prac- 
tice, unless  he  or  she  shall  have  obtained  a  certificate  as  here- 
inafter provided. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  prac- 
ticing dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to 
carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 
The  members  of  said  Board  shall  be  appointed  by  the 
Governor,  who  shall  select  them  from  ten  candidates,  whose 
names  shall  be  furnished  him  by  the  State  Dental  Associa- 
tion. The  term  for  which  the  members  of  said  board  shall 
hold  their  offices  shall  be  five  years,  except  that  the  mem- 
bers of  the  board  first  to  be  appointed  under  this  Act  shall 
hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  one,  two,  three,  four  and 
five  years,  respectively,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be 
duly  appointed.  In  case  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board, 
such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor  from  names 
presented  to  him  by  the  Minnesota  State  Dental  Association. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  261 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Minnesota  State  Dental  Society 
to  present  twice  the  number  of  names  to  the  Governor  of 
those  to  be  appointed. 

Sec.  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members  Presi- 
dent, and  one  the  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet  at  least 
once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener,  and  at  such  times 
and  places,  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A  majority  of  said 
board  shall,  at  all  times,  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  pro- 
ceedings thereof  shall,  at  all  reasonable  times,  be  open  to 
public  inspection. 

Sec  4.  Within  six  months  from  the  time  this  Act  takes 
effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  at  that 
time  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  to 
cause  his  or  her  name  and  residence,  or  place  of  business,  to 
be  registered  with  said  Board  of  Examiners,  who  shall  keep 
a  book  for  that  purpose.  The  statement  of  every  such  per- 
son shall  be  verified  under  oath,  before  a  Notary  Public  or 
Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  such  manner  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
the  Board  of  Examiners.  Every  person  who  shall  so  regis- 
ter with  said  board,  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry,  may 
continue  to  practice  the  same  as  such,  without  incurring  any 
of  the  liabilities  or  penalties  provided  in  this  Act,  and  shall 
pay  to  the  Board  of  Examiners  for  such  registration  a  fee  of 
one  dollar.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  to 
forward  to  the  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  each  county  in  the  State,  a 
certified  list  of  the  names  of  all  persons  residing  in  his  county, 
who  have  registered  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
Act ;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  Clerks  to  register  such 
names  in  a  book,  to  be  kept  for  that  purpose. 

Sec  5  Any  and  all  persons  who  shall  so  desire  may 
appear  before  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and 
be  examined  with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in 
dental  surgery  ;  and  if  the  examination  of  any  such  person, 
or  persons,  shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  Board 
of  Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons  as  they  shall  find 
to  possess  the  requisite  qualifications  a  certificate  to  that 
effect,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act;  said 
board  shall  also  indorse,  as  satisfactory,  diplomas  from  any 


2»>2  APPENDIX. 

reputable  dental  college,  when  satisfied  with  the  character 
of  such  institution,  upon  the  holder  of  such  diploma  furnish- 
ing evidence, satisfactory  to  the  hoard,  of  his  or  her  right  to 
the  same.  All  certificates  issued,  by  said  board  shall  be 
signed  by  its  officers,  and  such  certificate  shall  be  prima 
facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  Minnesota. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  provi- 
sions of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  dollars, 
nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  or  be  confined  six  months 
in  the  county  jail.  All  fines  received  under  this  Act  shall 
be  paid  into  the  common  school  fund  of  the  county  in  which 
such  conviction  takes  place. 

Sec.  7.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  maintaining  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  said  Board 
of  Examiners  may  charge  each  person  applying  to  or  appear- 
ing before  them  for  examination  for  a  certificate  of  qualifi- 
cation, a  fee  of  ten  dollars,  which  fee  shall  in  no  case  be 
returned  ;  and  out  of  the  funds  coming  into  the  possession 
of  the  board,  from  the  fees  so  charged,  the  members  of  said 
board  may  receive,  as  compensation,  the  sum  of  five  dollars 
for  each  day  actually  engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office, 
and  all  legitimate  and  necessary  expenses  incurred  in  attend- 
ing the  meetings  of  said  board  ;  said  expenses  shall  be  paid 
from  the  fees  and  penalties  received  by  the  board  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  and  no  part  of  the  salary  or  other 
expenses  of  the  board  shall  ever  be  paid  out  of  the  State 
treasury.  All  moneys  received  in  excess  of  said  per  diem 
allowance  and  other  expenses,  as  above  provided  for,  shall 
be  held  by  the  Secretary  of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for 
meeting  expenses  of  said  board,  and  carrying  out  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board  shall 
from  time  to  time  direct.  And  said  board  shall  make  an 
annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the  15th 
of  December,  of  each  year,  together  with  an  account  of  all 
moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them  persuant  to  this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  Any  person  who  shall   receive  a   certificate  of 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  263 

qualification  from  said  board,  shall  cause  his  or  her  certifi- 
cate to  be  registered  with  the  Clerk  of  Court  of  any  county 
or  counties  of  which  such  person  may  desire  to  engage  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry,  and  the  Clerks  of  the  Court  of  the 
several  counties  in  this  State  shall  charge  for  refiristerino- 
such  certificates  a  fee  of  twenty-five  cents  for  such  registra- 
tion. Any  failure,  neglect,  or  refusal  on  the  part  of  any 
person  holding  such  certificate,  to  register  the  same  with 
the  Clerk  of  Court,  as  above  directed,  for  a  period  of  six 
months,  shall  work  a  forfeiture  of  the  certificate,  and  no 
certificate,  when  once  forfeited,  shall  be  restored,  except 
upon  the  payment  to  said  Board  of  Examiners  of  the  sum 
of  twenty-five  dollars  as  a  penalty  for  such  neglect,  failure 
or  refusal. 

Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  knowingly  and  falsely 
claim,  or  pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  license, 
diploma  or  degree  granted  by  any  society,  or  who  shall 
falsely,  and  with  intent  to  deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pre- 
tend to  be  a  graduate  from  any  incorporated  dental  college,  not 
being  such  graduate,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  shall  be  liable  to  the  same  penalty  as  provided 
in  section  6  of  this  Act. 

Sec  10.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  passage. 

Approved  March  3d,  1885. 

MINNESOTA    AMENDMENT. 

As  will  be  seen,  this  law  presents  some  new  features 
and  is  in  some  respects  more  stringent  than  the  law  of 
1885,  which  it  supersedes,  or  than  those  which  have  hereto- 
fore been  adopted  in  the  several  states.  It  requires  both  a 
diploma  of  graduation  from  a  dental  school  in  good  stand, 
ing  and  submission  to  an  examination  before  the  State  Board 
of  Examiners,  with  practical  clinical  demonstration.  All 
practitioners  in  the  State  are  required  to  register,  and  new 
applicants  who  have  been  in  practice  for  ten  years  prior  to 
the  date  of  the  passage  of  the  act,  are  admitted  to  exam- 
ination before  the  board  without   a   diploma.     Provision  is 


264  APPENDIX. 

made  for  the  payment  of  an  annual  license  fee  of  one  dollar, 
and  also,  under  certain  conditions,  for  the  forfeiture  of  a  li- 
cense already  granted.  It  lias  been  the  earnest  endeavor  of 
the  projectors  of  the  law  to  furnish  some  additional  safe- 
guards against  charlatanry  and  incompetency,  and  it  is  be- 
lieved that  its  practical  application  will  result  in  much  im- 
provement in  the  status  of  dentistry  throughout  the  State. 

The  law,  which  is  entitled  "  An  Act  to  regulate  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Minnesota,"  and  which  goes 
into  effect  on  the  1st  of  September,  reads,  as  follows: 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
Minnesota,  From  and  after  September  1st,  1889,  it  shall  be 
unlawful  for  any  person  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State, 
unless  he  shall  have  first  obtained  a  certificate  of  registra- 
tion thereto,  and  tiled  the  same,  or  a  certified  copy  thereof, 
with  the  Clerk  of  the  District  Court  of  the  county  of  his  res- 
idence, all  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  resi- 
dent practicing  dentists  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it 
shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions 
of  this  Act.  The  members  of  the  first  board  under  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act  shall  consist  of  the  members  of  the  pres- 
ent Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  existing  under  chapter  199 
of  the  General  Laws  of  1885,  who  shall  hold  their  offices  as 
members  of  such  new  board  for  the  term  for  which  they 
were  appointed  under  said  former  Act,  and  until  their  succes- 
sors are  duly  appointed.  All  vacancies  in  said  board  shall 
be  filled  by  appointment  b}*  the  Governor  as  herinafter  pro- 
vided. The  term  for  which  members  of  said  board  shall  be 
appointed  shall  be  three  years,  and  until  their  successors 
shall  be  duly  appointed.  It  is  also  hereby  provided  that 
no  person  shall  serve  to  exceed  two  terms  in  succession.  In 
case  of  any  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board  in  the  term  of 
any  member  of  said  board,  such  vacancy  shall  be  tilled  for 
such  unexpired  term  by  the  Governor  from  names  to  be  pre- 
sented to  him,  within  two  months  of  the  occurrence  of  such 
vacancy,  by  the  Minnesota  State  Dental  Association,  in  the 
same  manner  as  hereinafter  provided.     It  shall  be  the  duty 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  265 

of  said  Minnesota  State  Dental  Association,  after  September 
1st,  1889,  annually,  prior  to  August  10th,  to  present  to  the 
Governor  the  names  of  twice  as  many  practicing  dentists  resi- 
dent in  this  State  as  there  are  regular  members  to  be  ap- 
pointed of  said  board,  prior  to  September  1st,  in  the  following 
year.  All  appointments  by  the  Governor  shall  be  made 
within  twenty  days  of  the  submission  of  such  names  to  him, 
and,  if  such  names  shall  not  be  submitted  to  him  within  the 
allotted  time,  he  shall  make  his  appointments  within  twenty 
days  from  the  expiration  of  the  time  allotted  for  such  pres- 
entation of  names  from  among  the  resident  practicing  den- 
tists ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  prevent  the 
appointment  of  two  members  of  said  board  from  among  the 
resident  practicing  dentists,  not  members  of  said  Minnesota 
State  Dental  Association,  if  the  Governor  shall  so  elect. 

Sec.  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  at  its  first  regular  meet- 
ing, annually,  one  of  its  members  President  and  one  Secre- 
tary thereof,  who,  severally,  shall  have  the  power  during  their 
term  of  office  to  administer  oaths  and  take  affidavits,  certi- 
fying thereto  under  their  hand  and  the  seal  of  the  said 
board.  And  after  September  1st,  1889,  said  board  shall  meet 
regularly,  at  least  twice  in  each  year,  to  wit :  On  the  first 
Tuesdays  in  April  and  October,  and  at  such  other  times  as 
may  be  deemed  necessary  by  the  board.  Such  meetings 
shall  be  held  at  the  medical  department  of  the  University  of 
the  State  of  Minnesota.  A  majority  of  said  board  shall,  at  all 
times,  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  proceedings  thereof  shall, 
at  all  reasonable  times,  be  open  to  public  inspection.  And  it 
is  furthermore  provided,  that  in  the  event  of  any  member  of 
said  board  absenting  himself  from  two  of  its  regular  meet- 
ings consecutively,  the  board  shall  declare  a  vacancy  to  exist, 
which  vaeanc}T  shall  be  filled  by  the  means  hereinbefore  pro- 
vided. 

Sec.  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  first  board  hereinbe- 
fore provided  for  to  meet  at  the  city  of  Duluth,  in  said  State, 
on  the  second  Tuesday  in  July,  1889,  and  elect  officers,  and, 
within  ten  days  thereafter,  to  transfer  to  a  register,  to  be  pro- 
vided by  them  for  that  purpose,  the  name,  residence,  and 


L't'.t;  APPENDIX. 

place  of  business  of  each  and  every  person,  who,  on  the  sec- 
ond Wednesday  in  July,  1889,  and  pursuant  to  an  Act  of  the 
Legislature  of  the  State  of  Minnesota,  approved  March  3d, 
1885,  shall  be  qualified  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State 
Of  Minnesota,  and  who  shall  then  be  duly  registered  on  the 
books  of  the  board  created  by  said  Act  of  March  3d,  1885. 
No  certificates  of  license  to  practice  dentistry  shall  be  issued 
after  the  second  Wednesday  in  July,  1889,  under  said  Act  of 
March  3d,  1885.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  said  Secretary  of 
the  first  board  hereby  created  to  send  to  each  person  so  reg- 
istered prior  to  August  5th,  1889,  a  certificate  of  his  en  regis- 
tration signed  by  the  President  and  Secretary  of  such  Board 
of  Examiners. 

Sec.  5.  Any  person,  or  persons,  who  shall  desire  to  be- 
gin the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Minnesota  on 
and  after  September  1st,  1889,  shall  file  his  name,  together 
with  an  application  for  examination,  with  the  Secretary  of 
the  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  and  at  the  time  of 
making  such  application  shall  pay  to  the  Secretary  of  said 
board  a  fee  of  ten  dollars,  and  shall  present  himself  at  the 
first  regular  meeting  thereafter  of  said  board,  to  undergo  ex- 
amination before  that  body.  In  order  to  be  eligible  for  such 
examination  such  person  shall  present  to  said  board  his  di- 
ploma from  some  dental  college  in  good  standing,  and  shall 
give  satisfactory  evidence  of  his  rightful  possession  of  the 
same  ;  'prodded  also,  that  the  board  may,  in  its  discretion, 
admit  to  examination  such  other  persons  as  shall  give  satis- 
factory evidence  of  having  been  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  ten  years  prior  to  the  date  of  passage  of  this  Act. 
Said  board  shall  have  the  power  to  determine  the  good  stand- 
ing of  any  college  or  colleges  from  which  such  diplomas  may 
have  been  granted.  The  examinations  shall  be  elementary 
and  practical  in  character,  but  sufficiently  thorough  to  test 
the  fitness  of  the  candidate  to  practice  dentistry.  It  shall 
include,  written  in  the  English  language,  questions  on  the  fol- 
lowing subjects :  Anatomy,  physiology,  chemistry,  materia 
medica,  therapeutics,  metallurgy,  histology,  pathology,  op- 
erative and  surgical  dentistry,  mechanical  dentistry,  and  also 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  267 

demonstrations  of  their  skill  in  operative  and  mechanical 
dentistry.  All  persons  successfully  passing  such  examina- 
tions shall  be  registered  as  licensed  dentists  in  the  board 
register  provided  for  in  section  4,  and  also  receive  a  certificate 
of  such  enregistration,  said  certificate  to  be  signed  by  the 
President  and  Secretary  of  the  board.  The  examination  fee 
shall  in  no  case  be  refunded. 

Sec.  6.  Recipients  of  said  certificate  of  enregistration 
shall  present  the  same  for  record  to  the  Clerk  of  the  District 
Court  of  the  county  in  which  they  reside,  and  shall  pay  a 
fee  of  fifty  cents  to  said  Clerk  for  the  registration  of  the 
same.  Said  Clerk  shall  record  said  certificate  in  a  book  to 
be  provided  by  him  for  that  purpose.  Any  person  so  licensed 
removing  his  residence  from  one  county  to  another  in  the 
State,  before  engaging  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  such 
other  county,  shall  obtain  from  the  Clerk  of  the  District 
Court  of  the  county,  in  which  said  certificate  of  registration 
is  recorded,  a  certified  copy  of  such  record,  or  else  obtain  a 
new  certificate  of  registration  from  the  Board  of  Examiners, 
and  shall,  before  commencing  practice  in  such  county,  file 
the  same  for  record  with  the  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  the  county 
to  which  he  removes,  and  pay  the  Clerk  for  recording  the 
same  the  fee  of  fifty  cents.  Any  failure,  neglect,  or  refusal 
on  the  part  of  any  person  holding  such  certificate  or  copy  of 
record  to  file  the  same  for  record  as  hereinbefore  provided, 
for  six  months  from  the  issuance  thereof,  shall  forfeit  the 
same.  Such  board  shall  be  entitled  to  a  fee  of  one  dollar 
for  the  reissue  of  any  certificate,  and  the  Clerk  of  the  Dis- 
trict Court  for  any  county  shall  be  entitled  to  a  fee  of  one 
dollar  for  making  and  certifying  a  copy  of  the  record  of  any 
such  certificate. 

Sec  7.  All  persons  shall  be  said  to  be  practicing  den- 
tistry within  the  meaning  of  this  Act,  who  shall  for  a  fee  or 
salary,  or  other  reward  paid  either  to  himself  or  to  another 
person  for  operations  or  parts  of  operations  of  any  kind, 
treat  diseases  or  lesions  of  the  human  teeth  or  jaws  or  cor- 
rect malpositions  thereof.  But  nothing  in  this  Act  con- 
tained shall  be  taken  to  apply  to  Acts  of  bova  fide  students 


208  APPENDIX. 

of  dentistry  done  in  the  pursuit  of  clinical  advantages,  under 
the  direct  supervision  of  a  preceptor  or  a  licensed  dentist  in 
this  State,  during  the  period  of  their  enrollment  in  a  dental 
college  and  attendance  upon  a  regular,  uninterrupted  course 
in  such  college. 

Sec.  8.  Out  of  the  funds  coming  into  the  possession  of 
the  board,  the  members  of  said  board  may  receive,  as  com- 
pensation, the  sum  of  five  dollars  for  each  day  actually  en- 
gaged in  the  duties  of  their  office,  and  mileage,  at  three  cents 
per  mile,  for  all  distances  necessarily  traveled  in  going  to  and 
coming  from  meetings  of  the  board.  Said  expenses  shall  be 
paid  from  the  fees  and  assessments  received  by  the  board 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  no  part  of  the  salary 
or  other  expenses  of  the  board  shall  ever  be  paid  out  of  the 
State  treasury.  All  moneys  received  in  excess  of  said  per  diem 
allowance  and  mileage  as  above  provided  for,  shall  be  held  by 
the  Secretary  of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  ex- 
penses of  said  board  and  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this 
Act,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board  may  from  time  to 
time  direct.  And  said  board  shall  make  an  annual  report 
of  the  proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the  fifteenth  of  De- 
cember of  each  year,  which  report  shall  contain  an  account 
of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them  pursuant  to 
this  Act. 

Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty  dol- 
lars, nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  to  be  confined  not 
less  than  one  month  or  more  than  three  months  in  the 
county  jail,  or  both.  And  all  fines  thus  received  shall  be 
paid  into  the  common  school  fund  of  the  county  in  which 
such  conviction  takes  place. 

Sec.  10.  Any  person  who  shall  knowingly  or  falsely 
claim,  or  pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  enregistra- 
tion,  diploma,  or  degree  granted  by  a  society  or  by  said 
board,  or  who  shall  falsely,  and  with  the  intent  to  deceive  the 
public,  claim  or  pretend  to  be  a  graduate  from  any  incorpo- 
rated  dental    college,  not   being   such   graduate,   shall    be 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  269 

deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  liable  to  the 
penalties  provided  in  section  9  of  this  Act. 

Sec  11.  .Justices  of  the  Peace  and  the  respective  munici- 
pal courts  shall  have  jurisdiction  over  violations  of  this  Act. 
It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  respective  County  Attorneys  to 
prosecute  all  violations  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  12.  Any  person  who  shall  be  licensed  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  and  who  shall  practice  dentistry 
under  a  false  name,  with  intent  to  deceive  the  public,  shall 
be  liable  to  have  said  license  revoked  upon  twenty  days' 
notice  of  such  proposed  revocation,  and  of  the  time  and  place 
of  considering  such  revocation  by  order  of  the  State  Board 
of  Dental  Examiners.  And  any  person  who,  after  revocation 
of  his  license,  shall  continue  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State 
of  Minnesota,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  violation  of  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  and  shall  be  subject  to  the  penalties 
provided  therein.  !Nor  shall  a  certificate  to  a  person  under 
one  name  be  any  defense  to  an  action  brought  against  him 
for  practicing  without  a  certificate  under  another,  unless  it 
be  shown  that  such  practice  under  such  other  name  was  done 
without  intent  to  defraud  or  deceive. 

Sec.  13.  Every  registered  dentist  shall  in  each  and  every 
year  after  1889  pay  to  said  Board  of  Examiners  the  sum  of 
one  dollar  as  a  license  fee  for  such  year.  Such  payment  shall 
be  made  prior  to  May  1st  in  each  and  every  year ;  and  in  case 
of  default  in  such  payment  by  any  person,  his  certificate  may 
be  revoked  by  the  Board  of  Examiners  upon  twenty  days' 
notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  considering  such  revocation. 
But  no  license  shall  be  revoked  for  such  non-payment,  if  the 
person  so  notified  shall  pay  before  or  at  such  consideration 
his  fee  and  such  penalty  as  may  be  imposed  by  said  board ; 
provided,  that  said  board  may  impose  a  penalty  of  five  dol- 
lars, and  no  more,  on  any  one  so  notified,  as  a  condition  of 
allowing  his  license  to  stand ;  provided  farther,  that  said 
Board  of  Examiners  may  collect  any  such  dues  by  suit. 

Sec  14.  The  Board  of  Examiners  created  by  this  Act 
may  sue  or  be  sued,  and  in  all  actions  brought  by  or  against 
it,  it  shall  be  made  a  party  under  the  name  of  the  Board  of 


270  APPENDIX. 

Dental  Examiners  of  the  State  of  Minnesota.  And  no  suit 
shall  abate  by  reason  of  any  change  in  the  membership  of 
said  board. 

Sec.  15.  Chapter  199  of  the  General  Laws  of  1885,  being 
an  Act,  entitled  "An  Act  to  Insure  the  Better  Education  of 
the  Practitioners  of  Dental  Surgery,  and  to  Regulate  the  Prac- 
tice of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Minnesota,"  approved  March 
3d,  1885,  is  hereby  repealed,  such  repeal  to  take  effect  Sep- 
tember 1st,  1889. 

Sec.  16.  All  effects  and  property  whatsoever  of  the 
Board  of  Dental  Examiners  created  by  said  Act  of  March  3d, 
1885,  shall  on  said  first  day  of  September,  1889,  be  and  be- 
come the  property  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  created  by  this 
Act,  and  said  board  hereby  created  is  hereby  declared  to  be 
the  legal  successor  of  the  board  created  by  said  Act  of  March 
3d,  1885. 

Sec.  17.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  passage. 


MISSISSIPPI. 


An  Act  to  Beg  (date  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Mis- 
sissippi. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
Mississippi,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  who 
is  not,  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  engaged  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry,  to  begin  such  practice,  unless  such 
person  shall  have  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of 
some  reputable  dental  college,  duly  authorized  by  the  laws 
of  this  State,  or  some  other  of  the  United  States  or  of  some 
foreign  country,  in  which  college,  granting  such  diploma, 
there  was,  at  the  time  of  such  grant,  annually  delivered  a 
full  course  of  lectures  and  instructions  in  dental  surgery,  and 
unless  such  person  shall  also  comply  with  the  other  provi- 
sions of  this  Act ;  provided,  however,  that  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  shall  not  apply  to  any  person  holding  the  diploma 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  271 

of  Doctor  of  Medicine  from  any  reputable  medical  college ; 
and  provided  further,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  con- 
strued as  to  prohibit  any  person  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  That  a  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  consisting  of 
five  practicing  dentists,  be  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it 
shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purposes,  and  enforce  the  provisions 
of  this  Act.  The  members  of  said  Board  of  Dental  Exam- 
iners shall  be  appointed  and  commissioned  by  the  Governor 
of  this  State.  Their  term  of  office  shall  be  for  five  years,  ex- 
cepting that  the  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  first 
appointed  shall  be  appointed  for  one,  two,  three,  four  and  five 
years,  respectively,  as  designated  by  the  Governor,  until  their 
respective  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed  and  commis- 
sioned. Any  vacancy  occurring  in  the  said  Board  of  Exam- 
iners may  be  filled  by  the  Governor  at  any  time. 

Sec  3.  That  said  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  elect 
one  of  their  number  President  and  one  the  Secretary  thereof, 
and  shall  meet  at  least  once  a  year  at  the  State  Capitol,  al- 
ways giving  thirty  days'  previous  notice  of  such  meeting,  by 
publication  in  some  public  newspaper,  published  in  the  city 
of  Jackson.  A  majority  of  said  board  shall  constitute  a 
quorum.  Full  minutes  of  their  proceedings  shall  be  kept* 
which  shall  be  always  subject  to  public  inspection  as  any 
other  public  records. 

Sec.  4.  That  every  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  this  State  shall,  within  ninety  days  from  the  date 
i  >f  approval  of  this  Act,  cause  his  or  her  name  and  residence, 
or  place  of  business,  to  be  registered  with  said  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers, who  shall  keep  a  suitable  book  for  that  purpose, 
and  every  person  who  shall  be  so  registered,  may  continue 
the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  without  incurring  the 
penalties  provided  for  in  this  Act. 

Sec.  5.  That  any  person  now  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  State,  failing  to  register  as  provided  for  in 
section  4  of  this  Act,  shall  not  be  permitted  to  continue  such 
practice  until  such  person  shall  have  been  examined  by  said 
Board  of  Examiners,  and  regularly  licensed  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 


272  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  6.  Tlmt  if  the  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  will- 
fully fail,  or  refuse,  to  register  any  name  presented  to  them 
within  the  time,  and  in  pursuance  of  section  4  of  this  Act, 
and  issue  a  certificate  to  such  person,  the  members  of  said 
Board  of  Examiners  so  failing,  or  refusing,  shall  be  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction,  be  punished  accord- 
ingly. 

Sec.  7.  That  any  person  who  may  desire  to  do  so,  and 
being  of  lawful  age  and  good  moral  character,  may  appear 
before  said  Board  of  Examiners  at  an}'  of  its  meetings,  regu- 
lar or  called,  and  be  examined  touching  such  applicant's 
knowledge,  skill,  and  proficiency  in  dental  surgery  ;  and,  up- 
on such  examination  proving  satisfactory,  said  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers shall  issue  a  license,  signed  by  the  President,  and 
countersigned  by  the  Secretary,  to  such  applicant,  to  practice 
dentistry  in  this  State.  And  such  license  shall  be  impressed 
with  the  seal  of  the  Mississippi  State  Dental  Association. 
Any  graduate  of  any  reputable  dental  college  may  obtain  at 
any  time,  without  examination,  such  license,  upon  presenta- 
tion of  his  diploma,  and  the  payment  of  a  fee  of  two  dollars 
to  said  Board  of  Examiners. 

Sec  8.  That  any  member  of  said  Board  of  Examiners 
may  issue  a  temporary  license  to  any  applicant,  after  a  satis- 
factory examination,  touching  the  skill  and  proficiency  of 
the  applicant,  the  license  to  remain  effective  only  until  the 
next  regular  meeting  of  the  board ;  provided,  that  no  such 
temporary  license  shall  be  granted  to  any  applicant  who  has 
been  rejected  by  the  Board  of  Examiners. 

Sec  9.  That  said  Board  of  Examiners  may  charge,  and 
collect,  from  any  person  appearing  before  them  for  examina- 
tion for  license  to  practice  dentistry,  a  fee  of  five  dollars ; 
and  for  every  license  issued  to  graduates  from  dental  col- 
leges, a  fee  of  two  dollars,  as  hereinbefore  provided  ;  and  all 
such  fees  shall  be  paid  over  into  the  treasury  of  the  Missis- 
sippi State  Dental  Association.  Out  of  the  fund  thus  created, 
said  Board  of  Examiners  may  receive  such  compensation  as 
may  be  fixed  by  said  State  Dental  Association,  subject  to  be 
changed,  from  time  to  time,  as  said  association  may  deter- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  273 

mine.  But  no  part  of  such  compensation,  or  any  of  such  ex- 
penses, shall  ever  be  paid  out  of  the  State  Treasury. 

Sec.  10.  That  any  person  licensed  by  said  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers, shall,  before  beginning  to  practice  dentistry,  pay  the 
privilege  tax  which  may  be  required  by  the  General  Statutes 
of  this  State,  and  have  his  license  from  said  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers recorded  in  the  deed  records  of  every  county  in 
which  he  may  desire  to  practice  his  profession. 

Sec.  11.  That  any  violation  of  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  shall  be  a  misdemeanor,  and  punishable  as  such,  the  fine 
in  no  case  being  less  than  ten  dollars. 

Sec.  12.  That  this  Act  take  effect  from  and  after  its 
passage. 

Approved  February  25th,  1882. 

Following  is  the  text  of  an  Act  amendatory  and  supple- 
mental to  an  Act  entitled,  "An  Act  to  regulate  the  practice 
of  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Mississippi,"  approved  February 
25th, 1882 : 

"Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State 
of  Mississippi,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  person,  whether  a  gradu- 
ate of  a  dental  college  or  not,  to  begin  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  this  State  of  Mississippi,  unless  such  person  shall 
have  first  been  examined  and  obtained  a  license  from  the 
'Board  of  Dental  Examiners,'  duly  authorized  and  ap- 
pointed under  the  provisions  of  an  Act  entitled,  'An  Act  to 
regulate  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,' "  approved 
February  25th,  1882,  etc. 

Approved  February  21st,  1890. 


MISSOURI. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Mis- 
souri. 
Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the   General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Missouri,  as  follows :  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  per- 
son to  practice  dentistry,  or  dental  surgery,  in   the  State  of 


274  APPENDIX. 

Missouri,  without  first  having;  received  a  diploma  from  a 
reputable  dental  college,  or  a  university,  duly  incorporated 
or  established  under  the  laws  of  souk-  one  of  the  United 
States,  or  of  a  foreign  government;  provided,  that  nothing 
in  section  1  of  this  Act  shall  apply  to  any  l<oi"i  fide  practi- 
tioner of  dentistry,  or  dental  surgery,  in  this  State  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act ;  and  provided,  that  nothing 
in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  physicians, 
surgeons  or  others  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  Every  person  who  shall  hereafter  engage  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry,  or  dental  surgery,  in  this  State,  shall 
file  a  copy  of  his  diploma  with  the  Clerk  of  the  County 
Court  in  the  county  in  which  he  resides,  and  in  the  city  of 
St.  Louis  with  the  City  Register,  which  copy  shall  be  sworn 
to  by  the  party  filing  the  same,  and  the  Clerk  shall  give  a 
certificate  of  such  fact,  with  the  seal  of  the  County  Clerk 
attached  thereto,  to  such  party  filing  the  cop}7  of  his  di- 
ploma, and  shall  file  and  register  the  name  of  the  person,  the 
date  of  filing,  and  the  nature  of  the  instrument,  in  a  book 
to  be  kept  by  him  for  that  purpose,  and  as  a  compensation 
for  his  services,  the  said  Clerk  for  filing  and  registering  the 
same,  shall  receive  a  fee  of  one  dollar,  to  be  paid  by  the  per- 
son filing  the  diploma. 

Sec.  3.  Every  bona  fide  practitioner  of  dentistry,  or 
dental  surgery,  residing  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  pass- 
age of  this  Act,  and  desiring  to  continue  the  same,  shall, 
within  ninety  days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  file  an  affi- 
davit of  the  said  facts  with  the  Clerk  of  the  County  Court 
of  the  county  in  which  he  resides,  or  with  the  City  Register 
of  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  if  he  resides  in  the  city  of  St. 
Louis ;  and  the  said  Clerk,  or  Register,  as  the  case  may  be, 
shall  register  the  name  of  and  give  a  certificate  to  the  party 
filing  the  affidavit,  in  like  manner  and  of  like  effect,  as  here- 
inbefore provided,  and  for  such  services  shall  receive  a  fee  of 
one  dollar,  to  be  paid  by  the  party  filing  the  affidavit. 

Sec.  4.  All  certificates  issued  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder 
to  practice  under  this  Act,  which  right  it  shall  be  incumbent 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  275 

upon  the  holder  to  prove  under  all  prosecutions  under  this 
Act. 

Sec.  5.  Every  person  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  shall,  upon  conviction  thereof,  be  deemed  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor,  and  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
twenty-five  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  for  each  of- 
fense; and  all  fines  so  collected  shall  belong  to  and  be  paid 
into  the  common  school  fund  of  the  county  where  the  offense 
was  committed. 

Passed  at  Jefferson  City,  Missouri,  April  2nd,  1883. 


NEBRASKA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  Punish  Vio- 
lation thereof,  in  the  State  of  Nebraska. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
Nebraska,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  State  of  Nebraska 
without  first  having  received  a  diploma  from  a  reputable  den- 
tal college  or  university  duly  incorporated  or  established  under 
the  laws  of  some  one  of  the  United  States  or  some  foreign 
government ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  section  1  of  this 
article  shall  apply  to  any  bona  fide  practitioner  of  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of 
this  Act ;  and  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so 
construed  as  to  prevent  physicians  or  surgeons  from  extract- 
ing teeth. 

Sec.  2.  Every  person  who  shall  hereafter  engage  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this  State,  shall  file 
a  copy  of  his  or  her  diploma  with  the  County  Clerk  of  the 
county  in  which  he  or  she  resides,  which  copy  shall  be  sworn 
to  by  the  party  filing  the  same ;  and  the  Clerk  shall  give  certifi- 
cate of  such  fact,  with  the  seal  of  the  county  attached  thereto,, 
to  such  party  filing  the  copy  of  his  or  her  diploma,  and  shall 


276  APPENDIX. 

file  and  register  the  name  of  the  person,  the  date  of  the  filing, 
and  the  nature  of  the  instrument  in  a  book  to  be  kept  by  him 
for  that  purpose,  and  as  a  compensation  for  his  services  the 
said  Clerk  for  filing  and  registering  the  same  shall  receive  a 
fee  of  one  dollar,  to  be  paid  by  the  person  filing  the  diploma. 

Sec.  3.  Every  bona  fide  practitioner  of  dentistry  or  den- 
tal surgery  residing  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage 
of  this  Act,  and  desiring  to  continue  the  same,  shall,  within 
ninety  days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  file  an  affidavit  of 
said  facts  as  to  the  length  of  time  he  or  she  has  practiced  in 
this  State  with  the  County  Clerk  of  the  county  in  which  he  or 
she  resides  ;  and  the  said  Clerk  shall  register  the  name  of  and 
give  a  certificate  to  the  party  filing  the  affidavit,  in  like  man- 
ner and  of  like  effect  as  hereinbefore  provided,  and  for  such 
service  shall  receive  a  fee  of  one  dollar,  to  be  paid  by  the 
party  filing  the  affidavit. 

Sec.  4.  All  certificates  issued  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder 
to  practice  under  this  Act. 

Sec  5.  Every  person  violating  the  provisions  of  this  Act 
shall,  upon  conviction  thereof,  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  fifty  dol- 
lars nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  for  each  and  every 
offense,  or  be  imprisoned  in  the  county  jail  for  sixty  days,  or 
both  fine  and  imprisonment  at  the  discretion  of  the  court, 
and  all  fines  collected  shall  belong  to  and  be  paid  into  the 
common  school  funds  of  the  county  where  the  offense  was 
committed. 

Sec  6.  Any  person  who  shall  have  filed  his  or  her  affi- 
davit or  diploma,  as  required  in  sections  2  and  3  of  this 
Act,  in  one  county  and  remove  to  another  county,  shall,  be- 
fore entering  upon  the  practice  of  his  or  her  profession  in 
such  last-named  county,  procure  a  certified  copy  of  the  record 
of  his  or  her  former  registry,  and  cause  such  transcript  to  be 
filed  and  recorded  in  the  dental  register  of  such  county  in 
which  he  or  she  has  removed. 

Approved  by  the  Governor  March  23d,  1387. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  277 

NEW  HAMPSHIRE. 

The  Following  are  Sections  of  the  General  Laws  of  the  State  of 
New  Hampshire  Relating  to  the  Practice  of  Dentistry : 

Section  3.  It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  person,  who  is 
not  duly  authorized  to  practice  medicine  or  surgery,  to  prac- 
tice dentistry,  unless  such  person  has  received  a  dental  de- 
gree from  some  college,  university,  or  medical  school  author- 
ized to  confer  the  same,  or  shall  have  obtained  a  license  from 
the  New  Hampshire  Dental  Society. 

Sec.  4.  Said  dental  society  shall,  at  such  time  and  in 
such  manner  as  may  be  prescribed  in  its  charter  or  by-laws,, 
elect  a  board  of  censors,  consisting  of  three  members,  who 
shall  be  elected  for  such  term  as  may  be  prescribed  by  the 
society ;  which  board  shall  have  authority  to  examine  and 
license  persons  to  practice  dentistry.  The  license  shall  be  re- 
corded by  the  clerk  of  said  society. 

Sec.  5.  No  person  receiving  a  license  as  herein  provided 
shall  be  authorized  to  practice  until  he  shall  have  procured 
the  same,  to  be  recorded  by  the  Clerk  of  the  Court  in  the 
county  where  he  resides,  if  a  resident  of  this  State ;  if  not  a 
resident  of  this  State,  in  the  county  where  he  intends  to 
practice.  Such  license  shall  be  recorded  in  a  book  provided 
for  that  purpose,  and  which  shall  bear  the  title  and  inscrip- 
tion of  the  Medical  and  Dental  Register  of county,. 

and  the  fee  for  recording  the  same  shall  be  fifty  cents. 

Sec  6.  Each  person  receiving  a  license  upon  examina- 
tion shall  pay  for  the  use  of  the  society  granting  the  same 
the  sum  of  five  dollars  ;  upon  diploma,  one  dollar. 

Sec  7.  If  any  person  shall  practice  medicine,  surgery, 
midwifery,  or  dentistry,  without  being  duly  authorized  as 
provided  in  this  chapter,  or  after  his  license  is  revoked,  he 
shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  more  than  three  hundred 
dollars  for  each  offense. 


278  APPENDIX. 

Following  is  the  text  of  a  bill,  entitled  "An  Act  to  Establish  a  Board 
of  Registration  in  Dentistry"  for  the  State  of  New  Hamp- 

shin . 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, in  General  Court  convened,  That  the  Governor, 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Council,  shall  appoint  three 
skilled  dentists,  of  good  repute,  residing  and  doing  business 
in  the  State,  who  shall  constitute  a  Board  of  Registration  in 
Dentistry ;  out  no  person  shall  be  eligible  to  serve  on  said 
board,  unless  he  shall  have  been  regularly  graduated  from 
some  reputable  medical  or  dental  college  duly  authorized  to 
grant  degrees  in  dentistry,  or  shall  have  been  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  ten  years 
previous  to  his  appointment.  The  term  for  which  the  mem- 
bers of  said  board  shall  hold  their  office  shall  be  three  years, 
except  that  one  of  the  members  of  the  board  first  to  be  ap- 
pointed shall  hold  his  office  for  the  term  of  one  year,  one  for 
the  term  of  two  years,  and  one  for  the  term  of  three  years  re- 
spectively, and  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed 
and  qualified.  Any  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board  shall  be 
filled  by  the  Governor  in  conformity  with  this  section  ;  and 
any  member  of  the  board  may  be  removed  from  office  for 
cause  by  the  Governor,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Council. 

Sec.  2.  The  board  shall  choose  from  its  members  a  Presi- 
dent and  Secretary,  and  it  shall  meet  at  least  once  in  each  year. 
Two  of  said  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum. 

Sec.  3.  "Within  six  months  from  the  time  this  Act  takes 
effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  at  that 
time  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  or  who 
has  received  a  dental  degree  from  some  college,  university, 
or  medical  school  authorized  to  confer  the  same,  or  who  shall 
have  obtained  a  license  from  the  New  Hampshire  Dental 
Society,  to  cause  his  name,  residence,  and  place  of  business 
to  be  registered  with  said  board,  who  shall  keep  a  book  for 
that  purpose.     The  statements  of  every  person  shall  be  veri- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  279 

fied  under  oath  in  such  manner  as  may  be  prescribed  by  the 
board.  Every  person  who  shall  so  register  with  said  board, 
as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry  shall  receive  a  certificate  to  that 
effect,  and  may  continue  to  practice  without  incurring  any 
of  the  liabilities  or  penalties  provided  in  this  Act. 

Sec.  4.  All  persons  not  provided  for  in  section  three  may 
appear  before  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and 
be  examined  with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in 
dentistry  and  dental  surgery  ;  and  the  board  shall  issue  to 
such  persons  as  it  finds  to  possess  the  requisite  qualifications 
a  certificate  to  that  effect. 

Sec.  5.  The  said  board  shall  charge  each  person  receiv- 
ing a  certificate  the  sum  of  fifty  cents,  and  each  person  ap- 
pearing before  them  for  examination  for  a  certificate  of  quali- 
fication a  fee  of  five  dollars,  in  case  such  certificate  shall  be 
granted.  Any  person  failing  to  pass  a  satisfactory  examina- 
tion shall  be  entitled  to  be  re-examined  at  any  future  meeting 
of  the  board.  The  board  shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its 
proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the  thirty-first  day  of  Decem- 
ber in  each  year.  All  fees  received  by  the  board  shall  be  paid 
annually  by  the  Secretary  of  the  b  oard  into  the  treasury  of 
the  State. 

Sec  6.  The  compensation  and  all  necessary  expenses  of 
the  board  shall  be  paid  from  the  treasury  of  the  State.  The 
compensation  of  the  board  shall  be  five  dollars  each  for  every 
day  actually  spent  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties,  and  their 
necessary  expenses  in  attending  the  meetings  of  the  board. 
Such  compensation  and  expenses  shall  be  approved  by  the 
board  and  sent  to  the  State  Treasurer,  who  shall  certify  to  the 
Governor  and  Council  the  amounts  due ;  })rovided,  that  the 
amount  so  paid  shall  not  exceed  the  amount  received  by  the 
Treasurer  from  the  board  in  fees  as  herein  specified,  and  so 
much  of  said  receipts  as  may  be  necessary  is  hereby  appro- 
priated for  the  compensation  and  expenses  aforesaid. 

Sec  7.  Any  person  who  shall  falsely  claim  or  pretend  to 
have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  license  granted  by  any  board 
organized  under  this  Act,  or  who  shall  falsely,  and  with 
intent  to  deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pretend  to  be  a  gradu- 


280  APPENDIX. 

ate  from  any  incorporated  dental  college,  or  who  shall  prac- 
tice dentistry  without  obtaining  a  certificate  as  provided  in 
this  Act,  or  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  provisions  of  this 
Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon 
conviction,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  one 
hundred  dollars  for  each  and  every  offense. 

Sec.  8.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  apply  to  anj^  practicing 
physician  who  is-  a  graduate  from  the  medical  department  of 
any  incorporated  college. 

Sec.  9.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  upon  its  passage,  and 
all  Acts  and  parts  of  Acts  inconsistent  with  the  provisions 
of  this  Act  are  hereby  repealed. 


NEW  JERSEY. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  to  Protect  the 
People  against  Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State 
of  New  Jersey. 

Section  1.  Re  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  General  As- 
sembly of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  That  from  and  after  the 
passage  of  this  Act  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  en- 
gage in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey, 
unless  said  person  has  graduated  and  received  a  diploma 
from  the  faculty  of  a  dental  college  chartered  under  the 
authority  of  some  one  of  the  United  States  or  foreign  gov- 
ernments, or  shall  have  obtained  a  certificate  from  a  Board 
of  Dentists  duly  authorized  and  appointed  by  this  Act  to 
issue  such  certificates. 

Sec  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  consist  of 
five  practitioners  of  dentistry,  who  are  members  in  good 
standing  of  the  New  Jersey  State  Dental  Society  ;  provided, 
that  said  practitioners  have  been  practicing  in  the  State  of 
New  Jersey  for  a  term  of  not  less  than  three  years;  said 
board  shall  be  elected  by  the  New  Jersey  State  Dental  Soci- 
ety to  serve  for  one  year ;  the  President  of  said  New  Jersey 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  281 

State  Dental  Society  shall  have  power  to  fill  all  vacancies 
in  said  board  for  unexpired  terms. 

Sec  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  first,  to 
meet  annually  at  the  time  of  meeting  of  the  New  Jersey  State 
Dental  Society,  or  oftener  at  the  call  of  any  three  of  the 
members  of  said  board  ;  thirty  days'  notice  must  be  given  of 
the  annual  meetings.  Secondly,  to  prescribe  a  course  of  read- 
ing for  those  who  study  dentistry  under  private  instruction. 
Thirdly,  to  grant  a  certificate  to  all  applicants  who  undergo 
a  satisfactory  examination.  Fourthly,  to  keep  a  book  in 
which  shall  be  registered  the  names  of  all  persons  having 
certificates  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has 
it  in  keeping,  with  the  common  seal,  shall  be  evidence  in 
any  court  in  the  State. 

Sec.  5.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  constitute 
a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business  ;  and  should  a  quorum 
not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  their  meeting,  those 
present  may  adjourn  from  day  to  day  until  a  quorum  is 
present. 

Sec  6.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this  Act, 
practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey  for  a  fee  or  re- 
ward, shall  be  liable  to  indictment,  and,  on  conviction,  shall 
be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dollars ; 
provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  pre- 
vent any  person  from  extracting  teeth  ;  and  provided  further, 
that  none  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  apply  to  regu- 
lar licensed  physicians  and  surgeons. 

Sec  7.  That  on  trial  of  such  indictment,  it  shall  be  incum- 
bent  on  the  defendant  to  show  that  he  has  authority,  under 
the  law,  to  practice  dentistry,  to  exempt  himself  from  such 
penalty. 

Sec  8.  That  one  half  of  all  fines  collected  shall  inure  to 
the  informer,  and  the  other  half  to  the  educational  fund  of 
the  county. 

Sec  0.  That  nothinginthis  Actshall  apply  to  persons  who 


282  APPENDIX. 

shall  be  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State  at 
the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  10.  That  to  provide  a  fund  to  carry  out  the  provi- 
sions of  the  third  section  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
Board  of  Examiners  to  collect  from  all  who  receive  the  cer- 
tificate to  practice  dentistry  the  sum  of  thirty  dollars  each  ; 
of  which  sum,  if  there  be  any  remaining  after  liquidating 
necessary  expenses,  the  balance  shall  be  paid  into  the  treasury 
of  the  said  New  Jersey  State  Dental  Society,  to  be  kept  as  a 
fund  for  the  more  perfect  carrying  out  of  the  provisions  of 
this  Act ;  and  the  Board  of  Examiners  for  their  remunera- 
tion shall  receive  from  the  above  fund  ten  dollars  per  day  for 
each  day  of  actual  service. 

Sec.  11.  That  this  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 

Approved  March  14th,  1873. 


The  following  amendment  to  the  dental  law  of  New 
Jersey  has  been  passed  by  the  Legislature  and  signed  by  the 
Governor  of  that  State  : 

A  Supplement  to  an  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice 
of  Dentistry,  and  to  Protect  the  People  against  Empiricism 
in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey"  approved 
March  fourteenth,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy- 
three. 

Section.  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  That  the  first  section  of  the 
Act  to  which  this  is  a  supplement,  shall  be  amended  so  as  to 
read,  as  follows : 

"  Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  That  from  and  after  the  passage 
of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  not  now  lawful  ly 
practicing,  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State 
of  New  Jersey,  unless  said  person  has  graduated  and  received 
a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  reputable  dental  college 
chartered  under  the  authority  of  some  one  of  the  United 
States ;  and  that  any  person  hereafter  engaging  in  the  practice 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  ,  283 

of  dentistry  in  the  State  shall,  within  one  month  after  com- 
mencing such  practice,  register  his  name  in  a  book  kept  for 
that  purpose  in  the  County  Clerk's  office  of  the  county  in 
which  he  shall  have  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry, 
giving  his  name,  and  the  name  of  the  dental  college  of  which 
he  is  a  graduate,  and  the  name  of  the  place  in  which  he  shall 
have  engaged  in  practice ;  and  for  which  registry  the  said 
County  Clerk  shall  be  entitled  to  demand  and  receive  from 
each  person  registering  the  sum  of  fifty  cents ;  and  any  per- 
son violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  liable 
to  the  penalties  prescribed  in  the  sixth  section  of  the  Act  to 
which  this  is  a  supplement." 

The  Following  Supplement  to  an  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  Regulate 
the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  to  Protect  the  People  against 
Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey," 
teas  passed  February  10th,  1880 : 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  That  from  and  after  the  pass- 
age of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  un- 
less said  person  has  pursued  a  regular  course  of  instruction 
for  at  least  one  year  in  a  reputable  dental  college  chartered 
under  the  authority  of  some  one  of  the  United  States  or  for- 
eign governments,  and  has  graduated  and  received  a  diploma 
from  such  college,  or  unless  the  said  person  shall  have  obtained 
a  certificate  from  a  Board  of  Dentists  duly  authorized  and  ap- 
pointed by  this  Act  to  issue  such  certificates,  and  shall  have 
registered  his  name  and  the  name  of  the  said  dental  colleg-e 
or  Board  of  Dentists  in  the  County  Clerk's  office  of  the 
county  in  which  he  shall  have  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry,  within  one  month  after  commencing  such  practice, 
in  a  book  to  be  provided  and  kept  for  that  purpose  in  the 
several  County  Clerks'  offices  of  the  several  counties  of  this 
State ;  and  for  which  registry  the  said  County  Clerk  shall  be 
entitled  to  demand  and  receive  from  each  person  registering 
the  sum  of  fifty  cents ;  and  any  person  violating  any  of  the 
provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  liable  to  the  penalties  pre- 


284  API'HNDIX. 

scribed  in  the  sixth  section  of  the  Act  to  which  this  is  a  sup- 
plement. 

Sec.  2.  That  this  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


The  Xew  Dental  Law  of  New  Jersey. 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  New 
Jersey,  which  was  signed  by  the  Governor  April  7th,  1890, 
and  is  now  in  force. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  That  a  board  or  commission  to 
be  known  as  the  State  Board  of  Registration  and  Examina- 
tion in  Dentistry  is  hereby  created,  to  consist  of  five  resident 
and  practicing  dentists,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  carry  out 
and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  Act;  the  present  members 
of  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  appointed  and  now  exist- 
ing under  the  Act  of  the  Legislature  of  this  State,  entitled 
"An  Act  to  regulate  the  practice  of  dentistry,  and  to  protect 
the  people  against  empiricism  in  relation  thereto,  in  the  State 
of  New  Jersey,"  approved  anno  doraini  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  seventy-three,  shall  constitute  the  first  members 
of  said  board  or  commission,  and  shall  hold  office  until  the 
first  Tuesday  in  October  next,  and  until  their  successors  are 
appointed,  as  hereinafter  provided ;  the  Xew  Jersey  State 
Dental  Society  shall,  at  its  next  annual  meeting,  recommend 
to  the  Governor  five  dentists  of  good  repute,  residing  and 
practicing  in  this  State,  whom  the  Governor  shall  appoint 
members  of  said  board  or  commission  to  fill  the  vacancies 
occurring  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  October  next,  as  hereinbe- 
fore provided ;  the  members  of  said  board  or  commission 
shall  be  appointed  for  the  term  of  five  years  and  until  their 
successors  are  duly  appointed,  except  that  of  the  members 
thereof  first  to  be  appointed  upon  recommendation  of  said 
society  ;  one  shall  hold  office  until  the  first  Tuesday  in  Oc- 
tober next ;  one  until  the  first  Tuesday  in  October,  anno 
domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  ninety-one;  one  un- 
til the  first  Tuesday  in  October,  anno  domini  one  thousand 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  285 

eight  hundred  and  ninety-two ;  one  until  the  first  Tuesday 
in  October,  anno  domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
ninety-three,  and  one  until  the  first  Tuesday  in  October,  anno 
domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  ninety-four;  and  the 
members  so  first  appointed  as  aforesaid  shall  immediately, 
upon  their  appointment,  determine  by  lot  the  period  for 
which  each  member  shall  hold  office ;  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  Xew  Jersey  State  Dental  Society,  at  each  annual  meeting 
after  the  next,  to  recommend  to  the  Governor  a  dentist  in 
good  repute,  residing  and  practicing  in  this  State,  whom  the 
Governor  shall  appoint  to  fill  the  vacancy  in  the  said  board 
occurring  in  the  year  in  which  such  meeting  is  held  ;  vacan- 
cies occurring  in  the  term  of  any  member,  or  members,  shall 
be  filled  for  the  unexpired  term  or  terms  only,  in  the  same 
manner,  upon  recommendation  to  be  made  by  said  society ; 
the  Governor  may  remove  any  member  of  said  board  for 
good  cause  shown,  upon  recommendation  of  the  Xew  Jersey 
State  Dental  Society. 

Sec.  2.  That  immediately  after  the  passage  of  this  Act, 
the  present  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  meet 
and  organize  as  the  State  Board  of  Registration  and  Exam- 
illation  in  Dentistry,  under  this  Act,  by  the  election  from 
their  number  of  a  President  and  Secretary,  who  shall  severally 
hold  office  until  the  first  Tuesday  in  October  next,  and  until 
their  successors  are  elected ;  the  board  shall  annually  elect 
from  its  number  a  President  and  Secretary,  who  shall  have 
the  power,  during  their  term  of  office,  to  administer  oaths 
and  take  affidavits,  certifying  thereto,  under  their  hands  and 
the  seal  of  the  said  board ;  said  board  shall  hold  at  least  two 
meetings  in  each  year,  for  the  purpose  of  examining  and  li- 
censing persons  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State ;  three  of 
sud  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and  its  proceedings 
shall,  at  all  reasonable  times,  be  open  to  public  inspection  ; 
said  board  shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to 
the  Governor  on  or  before  the  thirty-first  day  of  December, 
in  each  year ;  the  board  shall  adopt  rules  for  its  own  gov- 
ernment, and  rules  for  the  examination  and  licensing  prac- 
titioners  of   dentistry   in   this   State ;    the  examination  of 


286  APPKNDIX. 

applicants  for  license  to  practice  shall  be  confined  to  written 
or  oral  examination,  or  both  written  and  oral,  upon  subjects 
properly  relating  to  the  science  of  dentistry,  and  a  knowl- 
edge of  which  is  necessary  to  the  proper  and  skillful  prac- 
tice of  said  science ;  the  said  board  ma}'  also  require  from 
applicants,  as  part  of  the  examination,  demonstrations  of 
their  skill  in  operative  and  mechanical  dentistry  ;  and  any 
rule  altering  the  nature  of  the  examination  and  increasing 
the  severity  thereof,  or  the  subjects  to  be  included  therein, 
shall  not  be  enforced  at  any  examination  held  within  six 
months  after  its  adoption  and  public  promulgation ;  said  board 
shall  have  the  power  to  determine  the  good  standing  and 
repute  of  any  college  or  colleges,  and  may,  from  time  to  time, 
designate  in  some  public  manner  colleges  whose  diplomas 
will  be  received  by  it ;  the  said  board  shall  announce  in  the 
leading  dental  journals,  from  time  to  time,  its  regular  stated 
times  for  holding  examinations ;  it  shall  also  cause  to  be 
published,  at  least  once,  in  such  journals,  the  rules  and 
amendments  thereto  adopted  for  the  examination  and  licens- 
ing of  practitioners,  and  the  mode  and  terms  of  application 
for  examining  and  license,  which  shall,  in  all  cases,  be  rea- 
sonable and  fair ;  said  board  shall  adopt  a  common  seal,  and 
may  sue  or  be  sued,  and  in  all  actions  brought  by  or  against 
it,  it  shall  be  made  a  party  under  the  name  of  the  State  Board 
of  Registration  and  Examination  in  Dentistry. 

Sec.  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  law- 
fully practicing,  or  entitled  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State 
at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  apply  to  said  board, 
before  the  first  day  of  January,  anno  domini  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  ninety-one,  to  cause  his  name,  residence, 
and  place  of  business  to  be  registered  in  a  book  to  be  kept 
for  that  purpose  b}'  the  secretary  of  said  board ;  and  the  said 
board  shall  issue  to  each  person  registered  by  it  a  certificate 
under  its  seal  and  the  hand  of  its  President  and  Secretary, 
setting  forth  that  such  person  was,  at  the  time  of  the  passage 
of  this  Act,  lawfully  entitled,  by  the  laws  of  this  State,  to 
practice  dentistry  and  is  duly  registered  ;  the  said  board,  for 
good  cause  shown,  may   register  and  issue  its  certificates 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  287 

thereof,  to  any  person  applying  therefor  after  said  first  day 
of  January,  anno  domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
ninety-one,  provided  it  shall  appear  to  the  satisfaction  of  said 
board  that  the  person  so  applying  was  lawfully  practicing  or 
entitled  to  practice  dentistry  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of 
this  Act,  and  that  the  refusal  to  issue  such  certificate  will 
work  hardship  to  said  person  so  applying ;  the  said  board  may 
demand  from  any  person  applying  for  registration  and  certifi- 
cate proof  of  his  right  to  the  same  under  this  Act,  and  may 
refuse  to  grant  registration  and  certificate  thereof  to  any  per- 
son not  lawfully  entitled  thereto. 

Sec.  4.  That  any  person  aggrieved  by  such  action  of  said 
board  may  apply,  within  sixty  days  after  such  refusal  by  said 
board,  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  this  State  for  its  writ  of  man- 
damus to  compel  said  board  to  register  and  issue  its  certificate 
to  him  ;  and  in  case  any  Judge  of  said  court  shall  issue  or 
allow  on  such  application  an  order  on  said  board  to  show 
cause,  no  suit  for  the  collection  of  any  penalty  for  vioiation 
of  this  Act  shall  be  instituted  against  such  person  until  the 
final  hearing  and  determination  of  such  application. 

Sec.  5.  That  any  person  who  may  desire  to  begin  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State  after  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  shall  file  his  name,  together  with  an  application  for  ex- 
amination, in  the  form  provided  for  by  the  rules  of  said  board, 
with  the  secretary  of  said  board,  and  at  the  time  of  making 
such  application  shall  pay  to  the  secretary  of  said  board  a 
fee  of  twenty-five  dollars,  and  present  himself  for  examina- 
tion at  the  first  regular  meeting  of  the  board  thereafter  for 
examination  and  licensing  of  practitioners  in  dentistry,  due 
notice  of  which  meeting  shall  be  given  him  ;  the  examination 
fee  shall  in  no  case  be  refunded,  but  should  any  applicant, 
from  sickness  or  other  good  cause  appearing  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  the  board,  fail  to  attend  such  examination,  or  should 
any  person  appearing  fail  to  pass  successfully  the  examina- 
tion, such  person  so  failing  to  appear  or  failing  to  pass  shall 
be  admitted  to  any  subsequent  examination  or  examinations 
Avithoutthe  payment  of  further  or  other  fee;  every  applicant 
for  examination  shall,  with  his  application,  submit  to  the  said 


LNS  APPENDIX. 

board,  as  a  prerequisite  to  examination,  a  diploma  of  gradua- 
tion from  a  dental  college  recognized  by  said  board  as  in  good 
standing  and  repute,  and  proof,  if  the  board  shall  so  require, 
that  the  same  was  regulary  issued  and  conferred  upon  the 
holder  in  due  course  ;  or,  if  not  a  graduate  of  a  dental  college, 
a  certificate  under  oath  from  a  reputable  and  duly  authorized 
dentist  that  he  has  studied  with  and  under  such  dentist  as  a 
student  for  not  less  than  five  years  continuously  ;  all  persons 
successfully  passing  such  examination  shall  be  registered  as 
licensed  dentists  in  a  book,  to  be  kept  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
board  for  that  purpose,  and  shall  receive  from  said  board  a 
certificate  under  the  seal  of  said  board  and  the  hand  of  its 
President  and  Secretary,  that  the  person  named  therein  is  law- 
fully authorized  and  licensed  to  practice  dentistry  in  this 
State  ;  such  certificate,  lawfully  and  regularly  issued,  shall  be 
evidence  in  any  of  the  courts  of  this  State  of  the  right  of  the 
person  named  therein  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec.  6.  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  any 
person  desiring  to  study  denristry  in  this  State  with  any  duly 
authorized  dentists,  for  the  purpose  of  presenting  himself  for 
examination  and  license  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry  in  this 
State  at  the  expiration  of  his  term  of  study,  shall  cause  his 
name  and  residence,  and  the  name  and  residence  of  his  pre- 
ceptor, to  be  registered  with  such  board,  and  his  term  of  study 
shall  commence  and  date  only  from  such  registration ;  any 
person  so  registered  as  a  student  may  perform  mechanical 
work  in  the  office  of  his  preceptor,  but  no  student  shall  per- 
form any  operation  upon  the  mouth  or  jaw  of  any  person, 
save  in  the  presence  and  under  the  supervision  of  his  pre- 
ceptor, under  penalty  of  revocation  of  his  registration  as  a 
student  and  such  further  penalty  as  is  hereinafter  provided 
for  unlawful  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec.  7.  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  not  now 
by  the  laws  of  this  State  authorized,  hereafter  to  practice 
dentistry  in  this  State,  save  after  examination  and  license  by 
the  said  State  Board  of  Registration  and  Examination  in 
Dentistry,  and  no  person  shall  be  examined  by  said  board  for 
license,  unless  he  is,   at  the   time   of  such  examination,   a 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  289 

graduate  or  the  holder  of  a  diploma  of  graduation  from  a 
dental  college  recognized  as  in  good  repute  by  said  board, 
or  shall  have  studied  with  a  reputable  dentist  for  five  years 
continuously  preceding  his  application  for  examination. 

Sec.  8.  That  out  of  the  funds  coming  into  the  posses- 
sion of  said  board  shall  be  paid  the  expenses  of  said  board 
incurred  in  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  mile- 
age to  each  member,  at  the  rate  of  five  cents  per  mile  for  all 
distance  necessarily  traveled  in  discharge  of  his  duties  ;  no 
part  of  the  mileage  or  other  expenses  of  the  board  shall  ever 
be  paid  out  of  the  State  treasury  ;  all  moneys  received  shall  be 
held  by  the  Secretary  of  the  board,  and  paid  out  only  upon 
resolution  of  the  board  and  warrant  of  its  president,  and  the 
secretary  shall  give  bond  in  such  sum  as  the  board  shall,  from 
time  to  time,  direct,  with  good  and  sufficient  surety,  to  be 
approved  by  the  board  ;  and  the  said  board  shall,  in  its  annual 
report  to  be  made  to  the  Governor,  submit  a  statement  of  all 
moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  it  during  the  period  cov- 
ered by  said  report. 

Sec.  9.  That  any  person,  not  now  lawfully  practicing  or 
entitled  to  practice  dentistry  by  the  laws  of  this  State,  who 
shall  practice  dentistry  in  this  State  after  the  passage  of  this 
Act  without  having  first  obtained  from  said  Board  of  Regis- 
tration and  Examination  in  Dentistry  a  certificate  of  license 
to  practice  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
shall  forfeit  and  pay  the  sum  of  three  hundred  dollars  for 
each  and  every  offense ;  any  person  lawfully  practicing  or  en- 
titled to  practice  dentistry  under  the  laws  of  this  State,  who 
shall,  after  the  first  day  of  January,  anno  domini  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  ninety-one,  practice  dentistry  in  this 
State  without  having  first  obtained  from  said  Board  of  Regis- 
tration and  Examination  in  Dentistry  a  certificate  of  regis- 
tration, in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall 
pay  the  sum  of  fifty  dollars  for  each  and  every  offense ;  any 
person  who  shall  knowingly  or  falsely,  and  with  the  intent  to 
deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certifi- 
cate of  registration  or  of  license  granted  by  said  board,  or 
who  shall  falsely,  and  with  the  intent  to  deceive  said  board, 


290  APPENDIX. 

claim  or  pretend  to  be  a  graduate  or  the  holder  of  a  diploma 
of  graduation  from  any  dental  college,  not  being  such  gradu- 
ate or  rightfully  holding  or  entitled  to  such  diploma,  shall 
forfeit  and  pay  the  sum  of  three  hundred  dollars  ;  any  person 
to  whom  a  certificate  of  registration  or  of  license  shall  be 
issued  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  who  shall  prac- 
tice dentistry  under  a  false  name,  with  intent  to  deceive  the 
public,  shall  be  liable  to  have  such  certificate  revoked,  upon 
twenty  days'  notice  of  such  proposed  revocation,  and  of  the 
time  and  place  of  considering  such  revocation,  by  order  of 
the  said  board  ;  and  any  person  who,  after  such  revocation  of 
his  certificate,  shall  continue  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State, 
shall  forfeit  and  pay  the  sum  of  three  hundred  dollars  ;  a  cer- 
tificate of  registration  or  of  license  granted  toa person  under 
one  name  shall  not  be  pleaded  as  a  defense  to  an  action  brought 
against  him  for  practicing  without  a  certificate  under  another 
name  ;  each  and  every  separate  act  of  dentistry  performed 
by  any  person,  in  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this 
Act,  shall  be  deemed  and  taken  to  be  a  distinct  and  separate 
offense  ;  this  Act  shall  not  be  construed  to  prevent  any  per- 
son from  extracting  teeth,  or  to  apply  to  any  surgical  opera- 
tion performed  by  any  regular  licensed  physician  or  surgeon. 
Sec.  10.  That  the  penalties  imposed  and  the  sums  to  be 
forfeited  in  and  by  the  preceding  section  of  this  Act  shall  be 
sued  for  and  recovered,  with  costs  of  suit,  in  an  action  of  debt, 
to  be  brought  by  the  Board  of  Registration  and  Examination 
in  Dentistry  before  any  Judge  of  any  City  District  Court  in 
or  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  the  county  wherein  such  of- 
fense shall  have  been  committed,  or  in  any  county  wherein  such 
offender  may  reside;  one-half  of  such  penalty  or  forfeit  money 
shall  be  for  the  use  of  the  State  Board  of  Registration  and 
Examination  in  Dentistry,  and  one-half  shall  be  paid  into 
the  treasury  of  the  State  for  the  use  thereof;  and  in  case  the 
defendant  shall  fail  or  neglect  to  pay  the  amount  recovered 
against  him,  with  costs,  the  Judge  or  Court  before  whom 
judgment  has  been  obtained  shall  issue  his  process  against  the 
body  of  the  defendant,  and  cause  him  to  be  committed  to  the 
jail  of  the  county  in  which  the  judgment  is  obtained  until 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  291 

the  judgment  and  costs  are  paid  ;  the  imprisonment,  however, 
shall  not  exceed  four  calendar  months  from  the  date  of  such 
commitment. 

Sec.  11.  That  the  Act  of  the  Legislature  of  this  State,, 
entitled  "An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and 
to  Protect  the  People  against  Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto, 
in  the  State  of  New  Jersey,"  approved  March  the  fourteenth,, 
anno  domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy-three, 
the  supplement  thereto  approved  February  seventeenth,  anno 
domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty,  and  the  sup- 
plement thereto  approved  March  the  twenty-seventh,  anno 
domini  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-four,  and  all 
Acts  and  parts  of  Acts  inconsistent  herewith,  be  and  the 
same  hereby  are  repealed. 

Sec.  12.  That  this  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


NEW  YORK. 


An  Act  to  Incorporate  Dental  Societies  for  the  Purpose  of  Improv 
ing  and  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  this  State. 

Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  repre- 
sented in  Senate  and  Assembly,  do  enact,  as  follows :  It  shall  be 
lawful  for  the  dentists  in  the  several  judicial  districts  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  this  State  to  meet  together  at  the  follow- 
ing named  places,  to  wit:  In  District  No.  l,at  the  Cooper 
Institute,  in  the  city  of  New  York ;  District  No.  2,  at  the 
City  Hall,  in  the  city  of  Brooklyn  ;  District  No.  3,  at  the 
Delavan  House,  in  the  city  of  Albany  ;  District  No.  4,  at  the 
Clarendon  Hotel,  Saratoga  Springs;  District  No.  5,  at  the 
Stanwix  Hall  Hotel,  in  the  village  of  Rome  ;  District  No.  6, 
at  the  Lewis  House,  in  the  village  of  Binghamton ;  District 
No.  7,  at  the  Canandaigua  Hotel,  in  the  village  of  Canan- 
daigua;  District  No.  8,  at  the  Medical  Hall,  in  the  city  of 
Buffalo — on  the  first  Tuesday  of  June,  eighteen  hundred  and 
sixty-eight,  at  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon  of  that  day ;  and 


■202  APPENDIX. 

such  dentists  so  convened  as  aforesaid,  or  any  part  of  them 
not  less  than  fifteen  in  number,  shall  proceed  to  the  choice  of 
a  President,  Vice-President,  Secretary,  and  Treasurer,  who 
shall  hold  their  offices  for  one  year  and  until  others  shall  be 
chosen  in  their  places  ;  and  whenever  said  societies  shall  be 
organized  as  aforesaid,  they  are  hereby  constituted  bodies  cor- 
porate in  fact  and  under  the  names  of  the  "  District  Dental 
Society  "  of  the  respective  judicial  districts  where  they  shall 
be  located  ;  provided  always,  that  if  the  dentists  residing  in 
any  district  shall  not  meet  and  organize  themselves  as  afore- 
said, it  shall  be  lawful  for  them,  at  the  call  of  fifteen  dentists 
residing  in  such  district,  to  meet  at  such  other  time  and  place 
as  they  shall  designate,  and  their  proceedings  shall  be  as  valid 
as  if  such  meeting  had  been  at  the  time  before  specified. 

Sec.  2.  Each  of  said  district  societies,  when  organized  as 
aforesaid,  shall  elect  eight  delegates,  who  shall  meet  at  the  Capi- 
tol, in  the  city  of  Albany,  on  the  last  Tuesday  of  June,  eighteen 
hundred  and  sixty-eight,  and  proceed  to  organize  a  State 
Dental  Society,  which  shall  be  named  "  The  Dental  Society 
•of  the  State  of  Xew  York,"  and,  being  met,  not  less  than 
thirty-three  in  number,  shall  proceed  to  elect,  and  shall  there- 
after annually  elect,  a  President,  Vice-President,  Secretary. 
and  Treasurer,  who  shall  hold  their  offices  for  one  year  and 
until  others  shall  be  chosen  in  their  places ;  and  said  society 
shall  be  a  body  corporate  under  the  name  and  style  as  afore- 
said. 

Sec.  3.  The  Secretaries  of  each  of  the  district  societies 
shall  lodge  in  the  County  Clerk's  office  of  some  county  within 
their  district,  a  copy  of  all  the  proceedings  and  records  of 
their  organization  ;  and  it  shall  also  be  the  duty  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  State  Dental  Society  in  like  manner  to  lodge  in 
the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  State  a  copy  of  its  records  and 
proceedings  had  at  the  organization  thereof;  and  the  said 
County  Clerks  respectively,  and  the  Secretary  of  State,  shall 
file  the  same  in  their  respective  offices,  and  shall  receive  there- 
for a  fee  of . 

Sec.  4.  At  the  first  meeting  of  said  State  Dental  Society, 
the  same  being  duly  organized  as  aforesaid,  the  delegation 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  293 

from  each  district  society  shall  be  divided  into  four  classes 
of  two  delegates  each,  who  shall  serve  one,  two,  three,  and 
four  years  respectively,  and  until  others  shall  be  elected  in 
their  places ;  and  the  said  district  societies,  at  each  annual 
meeting  thereafter,  shall  choose  two  delegates  to  the  State 
society,  to  serve  each  four  years,  and  fill  all  vacancies  in  their 
respective  delegations  that  may  have  occurred  by  death  or 
otherwise. 

Sec.  5.  Each  of  the  incorporated  dental  colleges  of  this 
State  may  annually  elect  two  delegates  to  the  State  Dental 
Society,  who  shall  be  entitled  to  all  the  privileges  and  subject 
to  the  same  rules  and  regulations  as  other  delegates. 

Sec.  6.  The  said  State  Dental  Society  may  elect  perma- 
nent members  of  said  society  from  among  eminent  dentists 
residing  in  this  State,  but  not  to  exceed  twenty  in  number, 
at  its  first  meeting,  nor  more  than  five  in  any  one  year  there- 
after ;  which  members,  so  elected,  shall  be  entitled  to  all  the 
privileges  of  delegate  members,  but  shall  receive  no  compen- 
sation for  their  attendance  on  meetings  of  the  State  society, 
except  when  sent  as  delegates  by  the  district  societies  or  col- 
leges as  aforesaid.  And  the  said  State  society  may  elect 
honorary  members  from  any  State  or  country  ;  but  no  person 
shall  be  elected  an  honorary  member  who  is  eligible  to  regu- 
lar membership,  nor  shall  any  honorary  member  be  entitled 
to  vote  or  hold  any  office  in  said  society. 

Sec.  7.  The  several  district  societies,  established  as  afore- 
said, at  their  annual  meetings,  shall  appoint  not  less  than  three 
nor  more  than  five  censors,  to  continue  in  office  for  one  year 
and  until  others  are  chosen,  who  shall  constitute  a  Distinct 
Board  of  Censors,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  carefully  and  imparti- 
ally to  inquire  into  the  qualifications  of  all  persons  who  shall  pre- 
sent themselves  within  the  districts  where  they  reside  for  exami- 
nation, and  report  their  opinion,  in  writing,  to  the  President 
of  said  district  society,  who  shall  thereupon  issue,  on  the 
recommendation  of  said  Board  of  Censors,  a  certificate  of 
qualification  to  such  person  or  persons,  countersigned  by  the 
Secretary  and  bearing  the  seal  of  the  said  district  society. 

Sec.  8.  The  State  Dental  Society,  organized  as  aforesaid, 


204  APPENDIX. 

at  its  first  meeting,  shall  appoint  eight  censors,  one  from  each 
of  the  said  district  societies,  who  shall  constitute  a  State 
Board  of  Censors ;  and  at  the  first  meeting  of  said  hoard,  the 
members  shall  he  divided  into  four  classes,  to  serve,  one,  two, 
three,  and  four  years  respectively;  and  said  State  Dental 
Society  shall,  at  each  annual  meeting  thereafter, appoint  two 
censors,  to  serve  each  four  years  and  until  their  successors 
shall  be  chosen,  and  fill  all  vacancies  that  may  have  occurred 
in  the  board  by  death  or  otherwise.  Each  district  society 
shall  be  entitled  to  one,  and  only  one,  member  of  said  board 
of  censors.  Said  board  of  censors  shall  meet  at  least  once  in 
each  year  at  such  time  and  place  as  they  shall  designate;  and, 
being  thus  met,  they  or  a  majority  of  them  shall  carefully 
und  impartially  examine  all  persons  who  are  entitled  to  ex- 
amination under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  who  shall 
present  themselves  for  that  purpose,  and  report  their  opinion, 
in  writing,  to  the  President  of  said  State  Dental  Society  ;  and, 
on  the  recommendation  of  said  board,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  President  aforesaid  to  issue  a  diploma  to  such  person  or 
persons,  countersigned  by  the  Secretary,  and  bearing  the  seal 
of  said  society. 

Sec.  9.  All  dentists  in  regular  practice  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  and  all  persons  who  shall  have  received 
a  diploma  from  any  dental  college  in  this  State,  and  all  stu- 
dents who  shall  have  studied  and  practiced  dental  surgery 
with  some  accredited  dentist  or  dentists  for  the  term  of  four 
years,  shall  be  entitled  to  an  examination  by  said  Board  of 
Censors.  Deductions  from  such  term  of  four  years  shall  he 
made  in  either  of  the  following  cases: 

1.  If  the  student,  after  the  age  of  sixteen,  shall  have  pur- 
sued any  of  the  studies  usual  in  the  college  of  this  State,  the 
period,  not  exceeding  one  year,  during  which  he  shall  have 
pursued  such  studies,  shall  be  deducted. 

2.  If  the  student,  after  the  age  of  sixteen,  shall  have  at- 
tended a  complete  course  of  lectures  in  any  incorporated 
dental  or  medical  college  in  this  State  or  elsewhere,  one  year 
shall  be  deducted. 

Sec.  10.  Every  person  on  receiving  a  diploma  from  the 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  295 

State  Dental  Society  shall  pay  into  the  treasury  thereof  the 
sum  of  twenty  dollars,  and,  on  receiving  a  certificate  of  quali- 
fication from  the  dental  society  of  any  district,  the  sum  of 
ten  dollars  into  the  treasury  thereof. 

Sec.  11.  The  dental  societies  of  the  respective  districts 
and  the  dental  society  of  the  State  may  purchase  and  hold 
such  real  and  personal  estate  as  the  purposes  of  their  respec- 
tive corporations  may  require — the  district  societies  each  not 
-exceeding  in  value  the  sum  of  five  thousand  dollars,  and  the 
State  Dental  Society  not  exceeding  twenty  thousand  dollars 
in  value. 

Sec.  12.  The  respective  societies  herein  provided  for  may 
make  all  needful  by-laws,  rules,  and  regulations  not  inconsist- 
ent with  any  existing  law,  for  the  management  of  the  af- 
fairs and  property  of  said  societies  respectively,  and  providing 
for  the  admission  and  expulsion  of  members ;  provided,  that 
such  by-laws,  rules,  and  regulations  of  the  respective  district 
societies  shall  not  be  repugnant  to  or  inconsistent  with  the 
by-laws,  rules,  and  regulations  of  the  State  Dental  Society. 

Sec.  13.  All  dentists  who  shall  have  been  in  regular  prac- 
tice in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and 
all  persons  who  shall  have  received  a  certificate  of  qualifica- 
tion from  any  district  society,  shall  be  eligible  to  member- 
ship in  said  district  societies. 

Sec.  14.  The  Dental  Society  of  the  State  of  New  York 
shall  be  entitled  to  all  the  privileges  and  immunities  granted 
to  the  medical  societies  of  this  State. 

Sec.  15.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 

Approved  April  7th,  1868. 

An  Act  to  amend  an  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  Incorporate  Dental 
Societies,  for  the  Purpose  of  Improving  and  Regulating  the 
Practice  of  Dentistry  in  this  State." 

Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  represented 
in  Senate  and  Assembly,  do  enact  as  follows,  That  section  8 
of  the  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  Incorporate  Dental  Societies, 
for  the  Purpose  of  Improving  and  Regulating  the  Practice 


296  APPENDIX. 

of  Dentistry  in  this  State,"  is  hereby  amended  so  as  to  read 
as  follows : 

"  Sec.  8.  The  State  Dental  Society,  organized  as  afore- 
said, at  its  first  meeting,  shall  appoint  eight  censors,  one  from 
each  of  the  said  district  societies,  who  shall  constitute  a  State 
Board  of  Censors ;  and  at  the  first  meeting  of  the  said  board  r 
the  members  shall  be  divided  into  four  classes,  to  serve  one, 
two,  three  and  four  years  respectively  ;  and  said  State  Dental 
Society  shall,  at  each  annual  meeting  thereafter,  appoint  two 
censors,  to  serve  each  four  years  and  until  their  successors 
shall  be  chosen,  and  fill  all  vacancies  that  may  have  occurred 
in  the  board  by  death  or  otherwise.  Each  district  society 
shall  be  entitled  to  one,  and  only  one,  member  of  said  Board 
of  Censors.  Said  Board  of  Censors  shall  meet  at  least  once  in 
each  year  at  such  time  and  place  as  they  shall  designate  ;  and, 
being  thus  met,  they  or  a  majority  of  them  shall  carefully 
and  impartially  examine  all  persons  who  are  entitled  to  ex- 
amination under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  who  shall 
present  themselves  for  that  purpose,  and  report  their  opinion, 
in  writing,  to  the  President  of  said  State  Dental  Society ;  and, 
on  the  recommendation  of  the  said  board,  it  shall  be  the  duty 
of  the  President  aforesaid  to  issue  a  diploma  to  such  person 
or  persons,  countersigned  by  the  Secretary  and  bearing  the 
seal  of  said  society,  conferring  upon  him  the  degree  of '  Master 
of  Dental  Surgery  '  (M.  D.  S.)  ;  and  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for 
any  other  society,  college,  or  corporation  to  grant  to  any  per- 
son the  said  degree  of  'Master  of  Dental  Surgery.'  ' 

Sec.  2.  Any  person  who  shall  knowingly  or  falsely  claim, 
or  pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  license,  diploma, 
or  degree  granted  by  any  society  organized  under  and  pur- 
suant to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  who  shall  falsely,  and 
with  intent  to  deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pretend  to  be  a 
graduate  from  any  incorporated  dental  college,  not  being 
such  graduate,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor. 

Sec  3.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 

The  following  Act  is  additional  to  legislation  already  had 
on  the  subject  in  the  State  of  New  York : 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  297 

An  Act  for  the  Relief  of  Certain  Persons  Engaged  in  the  Regu- 
lar Practice  of  Dentistry  in  this  State. 

Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York;  represented 
in  Sened&and  Assembly,  do  enact  as  follows,  That  any  person 
who  was  engaged  in  the  regular  practice  of  dentistry  within 
this  State  on  the  twentieth  day  of  June,  eighteen  hundred 
and  seventy-nine,  and  who  was  entitled  to  registration  as  a 
dentist,  as  provided  by  the  third  section  of  chapter  rive  hun- 
dred and  forty  of  the  laws  of  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy- 
nine,  entitled  "  An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry 
in  the  State  of  ]STew  York,"  but  who  failed  to  cause  his  name 
to  be  registered  as  therein  provided,  and  who  shall  make  and 
file  with  the  Clerk  of  the  county  in  which  he  registers  his  affi- 
davit to  the  effect  that  he  was  so  engaged  in  such  practice  of 
dentistry  and  so  entitled  to  registration,  may,  within  sixty 
days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  cause  his  name,  office,  and 
post-office  address  to  be  registered  in  the  County  Clerk's  office 
in  the  manner  provided  in  said  third  section  of  said  Act ;  and 
such  registration  shall  have  like  force  and  effect  as  if  made 
within  the  time  prescribed  by  said  section  of  said  Act.  Any 
person  who  shall  willfully  make  and  file  a  false  affidavit  for 
the  purpose  of  procuring  such  registration  shall  be  subject  to 
conviction  and  punishment  for  perjury. 

Sec.  2.  Every  person  hereafter  authorized  to  practice 
dentistry  within  this  State  shall,  before  commencing  to  prac- 
tice, register  in  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  county  where  he  in- 
tends to  commence  the  practice  of  dentistry,  in  a  book  to  be 
kept  for  that  purpose,  his  name,  office,  and  post-office  ad- 
dress, together  with  the  name  of  the  society,  college,  or  other 
authority  from  which  he  has  received  his  diploma  or  certifi- 
cate of  qualification  to  practice  dentistry. 

Sec  3.  The  Clerk  of  any  county  shall  be  obliged,  upon 
the  payment  to  him  of  the  sum  of  twenty-five  cents,  to  make 
the  registry  of  any  person  provided  for  in  the  second  section 
of  this  Act,  which  sum  the  Clerk  is  entitled  to  collect  and  re- 
ceive from  the  person  registering. 

Sec  4.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


298  appendix. 

New  York's  Ax\iended  Dental  Law. 

The  following  is  the  amended  dental  law  of  the  State  of 
New  York,  which  bears  the  following  title :  "Chapter  280: 
An  Act  to  amend  chapter  five  hundred  and  forty  of  the  laws 
of  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  entitled  '  An  Act  to 
Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  New- York.' ': 
Having  passed  the  Legislature,  it  received  the  signature  of 
Governor  Hill,  May  10th,  1888.     It  reads  as  follows: 

Section  1.  The  People  of  the  Stat  of  N<  w  York,  repre- 
sented in  Senate  and  Asscmljly,  do  enact,  That  Section  one  of 
chapter  five  hundred  and  forty  of  the  laws  of  eighteen  hun- 
dred and  seventy-nine,  entitled  "  An  Act  to  Regulate  the 
Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  NewT  York,"  is  hereby 
amended  so  as  to  read  as  follows : 

"  Sec.  1.  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  practice 
dentistry  in  the  State  of  New  York  for  fee  or  reward,  or  to 
assist  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  as  either  agent  or  employe, 
unless  he  shall  have  received  a  proper  diploma  or  certificate 
of  qualification  from  the  State  Dental  Society  or  from  the 
faculty  of  a  reputable  dental  or  medical  college,  recognized 
as  such  by  said  society,  and  shall  be  duly  registered  and  shall 
have  received  a  certificate  thereof,  as  provided  in  section  three 
of  this  Act ;  provided,  that  persons  who  are  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Xew  York  on  the  twen- 
tieth day  of  June,  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  who 
shall  comply  with  the  requirements  of  section  three  of  this 
Act,  shall  be  otherwise  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  this 
section  ;  and  provided  further,  that  nothing  contained  in  this 
section  shall  prevent  a  student,  wTho  is  pursuing  a  regular 
course  of  instruction,  from  assisting  a  person  in  the  practice 
of  dentistry  qualified  as  hereinbefore  provided.  Any  person 
who  shall  practice  dentistry  for  fee  or  reward  in  this  State, 
without  having  complied  with  the  regulations  of  this  Act, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  convic- 
tion thereof,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than 
two  hundred  dollars  for  each  offense.  All  such  fines  shall 
be  paid  into  the  treasury  of  the  county  where  such  conviction 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  299 

shall  have  taken  place,  for  the  benefit  of  the  common  schools 
of  the  county." 

Sec  2.  Section  three  of  said  Act  is  hereby  amended  so  as 
to  read  as  follows : 

Sec.  3.  Every  person  practicing  dentistry  within  this 
State  shall  register  in  the  office  of  the  Clerk  of  the  county 
where  his  place  of  business  is  located,  and  in  the  office  of  the 
Clerk  of  any  county  into  which  he  shall  remove  his  place  of 
business,  in  a  book  to  be  prepared  and  kept  by  the  Clerk  for 
that  purpose,  giving  his  name,  office,  and  post-office  address 
and  the  date  of  such  registration,  and  shall,  on  presenting  to 
the  County  Clerk  a  certificate  from  the  member  of  the  State 
Board  of  Censors  appointed  by  the  State  Dental  Society  for 
the  judicial  district  in  which  such  county  is  situated  that  he 
has  received  a  proper  diploma  or  certificate  of  qualification  as 
provided  in  section  one  of  this  Act,  be  entitled  to  register  and 
to  receive  a  certificate  of  such  registration  upon  the  payment 
to  the  County  Clerk  of  a  fee  of  fifty  cents. 

Sec  4.  All  Acts  or  parts  of  Acts  inconsistent  or  in  any- 
wise conflicting  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  are  hereby 
repealed. 

Sec  5.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


NORTH  CAROLINA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  to  Protect  the 
People  against  Quackery  in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State  of 
North  Carolina,  and  Providing  Penalties  for  the  Violation 
of  the  same. 

Section  1.  The  General  Assembly  of  North  Carolina  do 
'  i>>ict,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  except  regu- 
larly authorized  physicians  and  surgeons,  to  commence  the 
practice  of  dentistry,  unless  said  person  has  been  graduated 
and  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  reputable  insti- 
tution where  this  specialty  is  taught,  and  chartered  under  the 


300  APPENDIX. 

authority  of  some  one  of  the  United  States,  or  of  a  foreign 
government,  acknowledged  as  such,  or  shall  have  obtained  a 
certificate  from  a  Board  of  Examiners  duly  appointed  and 
authorized  by  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  to  issue  such 
certificate. 

Sec.  2.  The  said  Board  of  Examiners,  hereinbefore  pro- 
vided for,  shall  consist  of  six  members  of  the  North  Carolina 
Dental  Society,  to  be  elected  by  the  said  society  at  its  next 
annual  meeting,  and  shall  hold  office  as  follows  :  Two  for  one 
year,  two  for  two  years,  and  two  for  three  years,  or  until  their 
successors  are  elected.  The  said  board  shall  also  have  power 
to  fill  all  vacancies  for  unexpired  terms,  and  they  shall  be  re- 
sponsible to  said  State  society  for  their  acts. 

Sec.  3.  The  Board  of  Examiners  shall  meet,  annually  at 
the  time  and  place  of  the  meeting  of  the  Norn  Carolina  State 
Dental  Society,  and  at  such  other  times  and  places  as  the  said 
board  or  any  four  members  thereof  shall  agree  upon,  to  con- 
duct the  examination  of  applicants,  thirty  days'  notice  of  said 
meeting  being  given  by  advertising  in  at  least  three  news- 
papers published  in  this  State. 

Sec.  4.  Said  board  shall  grant  a  certificate  of  proficiency 
in  the  knowledge  and  practice  of  dentistry  to  all  applicants 
who  shall  undergo  a  satisfactory  examination,  and  who  shall 
receive  a  majority  of  votes  of  said  board  upon  such  profi- 
ciency, which  certificate  shall  be  signed  by  the  members  of  the 
board  conducting  said  examination,  and  shall  bear  the  seal  of 
the  said  North  Carolina  Dental  Society ;  provided^  that  any 
person  wishing  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  at  any 
time  prior  to  the  regular  meeting  of  said  board,  may  be 
examined  by  any  one  member  of  said  board,  and,  if  competent, 
may  receive  a  temporary  certificate,  which  shall  be  in  force 
only  until  the  next  regular  meeting  ;  and  no  member  of  said 
board  shall  grant  a  temporary  certificate  a  second  time  to  the 
same  person. 

Sec.  5.  Said  board  shall  keep  a  book,  in  which  shall  be 
entered  the  names  and  proficiency  of  all  persons  to  whom 
certificates  shall  be  granted  under  the  provisions  of  this 
chapter,  and  the  date  of  granting  such  certificate,  and  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  30  L 

book  so  provided  shall  be  deemed  a  book  of  record,  and  a 
transcript  of  any  such  entry  therein,  certified  to  under  the 
hand  of  the  Secretary  and  seal  of  the  North  Carolina  Dental 
Society,  shall  be  admitted  as  evidence  in  any  court,  when  the 
same  shall  be  otherwise  competent. 

Sec.  6.  Four  members  of  said  board  shall  constitute  a 
quorum  thereof  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  should  a 
quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  the  meeting 
of  said  board,  those  present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day, 
until  a  quorum  is  present. 

Sec.  7.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  dentistry  in  this 
State  without  having  first  stood  the  examination,  and  ob- 
tained the  certificate  hereinbefore  provided,  shall  be  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction,  shall  be  fined  twenty- 
five  dollars ;  provided,  that  any  person  so  convicted  shall  not 
be  entitled  to  sue  for,  or  recover,  any  fee  or  charge  for  dental 
service  in  any  court,  and  any  sum  of  money  paid  to  a  per- 
son so  convicted,  for  dental  service  rendered,  may  be  recovered 
by  the  person  so  paying  the  same,  or  his  legal  representative  ; 
provided,  that  no  one  applying  for  a  license  to  practice  den- 
tistry shall  be  denied  such  license  on  account  of  race,  color 
or  previous  condition  of  servitude. 

Sec  8.  All  fines  and  penalties  so  recovered  shall  be  ap- 
propriated to  the  school  fund  of  the  county  in  which  the 
same  shall  have  been  recovered. 

Sec  9.  Nothing  in  this  chapter  shall  apply  to  any  per- 
son engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  before  the  seventh 
day  of  March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy -nine, 
or  to  prevent  any  one  from  extracting  teeth. 

In  February,  1883,  the  General  Assembly  amended  sec- 
tion one,  so  it  now  reads  thus  : 

"It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  except  regularly 
authorized  physicians  and  surgeons,  to  commence  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry,  unless  said  person  shall  have  obtained  a 
certificate  from  a  Board  of  Examiners  duly  appointed  and 
authorized  by  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  to  issue  such 
certificate." 


302  APPENDIX. 

NORTH  (AND  SOUTH)  DAKOTA. 

An  Act  to  Revise  and  am<  nd  an  Aet  entitled  "An  Act  to  Insure 
the  Better  Education  of  Practitioners  of  Dental  Surgery, 
and  to  RegulaU  th  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  tht  Territory 
of  Dakota." 

Section  1.  B<  it  <  naeted  by  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the 

Stak  of  North  Dakota,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  per- 
son who  is  not,  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  law- 
fully entitled  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  pursuant*  to 
the  provisions  of  the  Act  of  which  this  Act  is  a  revision  and 
amendment,  to  practice  or  attempt  to  practice  dentistry  in 
this  State,  unless  such  persons  shall  have  first  received  a 
license  to  practice  dentistry  from  the  Board  of  Dental  Exami- 
ners, as  hereinafter  provided. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  practic- 
ing dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  carry 
out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  The 
members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Governor. 
The  term  for  which  the  members  of  said  board  shall  hold 
their  oflices  shall  be  five  years,  except  that  the  members  of 
the  board  appointed  by  the  Governor  pursuant  to  the  provi- 
sions of  the  Act  to  which  this  is  an  amendment,  residing  in 
North  Dakota,  and  acting  as  such  at  the  time  this  Act  shall 
take  effect,  shall  hold  their  respective  offices  until  the  close 
of  the  term  for  which  they  were  respectively  appointed.  The 
offices  of  those  living  in  South  Dakota  are  hereby  declared 
vacant  and  shall  be  filled  as  in  case  of  any  other  vacancy. 
Any  vacancy  in  said  board,  whether  by  removal,  death,  res- 
ignation, or  otherwise,  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor.  No 
person  who  shall  be  in  any  manner  pecuniarily  interested  in, 
or  who  shall  be  officially  connected  with,  any  dental  college 
or  dental  department  of  any  school  or  university,  shall  be  ap- 
pointed a  member  of  said  board. 

Sec  3.  Said  board  shall  have  power  to  make  reasonable 
rules  and  regulations  for  carrying  into  effect  and  maintaining 
the  provisions  of  this  Act.     It  shall  choose  one  of  its  mem- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  303 

!>ers  President  and  one  Secretary  thereof,  and  shall  hold  regu- 
lar meetings  twice  in  each  year,  and  such  other  regular  and 
special  meetings  as  said  board  may  by  its  rules  provide.  A 
majority  of  said  board  shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quorum 
thereof  for  the  transaction  of  business,  but  a  less  number  may 
adjourn  from  time  to  time.  The  board  shall  keep  full  and 
complete  minutes  of  its  proceedings,  and  of  its  receipts  and  dis- 
bursements, and  a  full  and  accurate  list  of  all  persons  licensed 
and  registered  by  said  board,  and  such  records,  together  with 
the  list  of  licensed  and  registered  dentists,  to  be  kept  as  afore- 
said, shall  be  public  records,  and  shall,  at  all  reasonable  times, 
be  open  to  public  inspection,  and  such  records,  or  a  transcript 
of  the  same,  or  of  any  part  thereof,  under  the  seal  of  the 
board,  duly  certified  by  the  Secretary  thereof,  shall,  at  all 
times  and  places,  be  competent  evidence  of  the  facts  therein 
stated  or  recited.  A  sworn  statement  by  the  Secretary,  under 
the  seal  of  the  board,  stating  that  any  person  is  or  is  not  a 
registered  dentist,  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  that  such  per- 
son is  or  is  not  entitled  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 
The  President  of  the  board  and  the  Secretary  thereof  shall 
have  authority  to  administer  oaths,  and  the  board  shall  have 
power  to  hear  testimony  as  to  all  matters  relating  to  the 
duties  imposed  upon  it  by  law. 

Sec.  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who,  at  the 
time  this  Act  shall  take  effect,  is  a  legally  qualified  practi- 
tioner of  dentistry  in  this  State,  as  shown  by  the  books  of 
registration  kept  by  said  board,  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Act  of  which  this  is  an  amendment,  and  who  is  desirous  to 
continue  such  practice,  and  of  all  persons  who  shall  there- 
after be  licensed  by  said  board  to  practice  dentistry,  to  procure 
from  the  Secretary  of  said  board,  on  or  before  the  thirty-first 
day  of  May,  1890,  and  annually  thereafter,  a  certificate  of 
registration  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry  in  this  State.  Such 
i ertincate  shall  be  issued  by  the  Secretary  upon  payment  of 
a  registration  fee,  to  be  fixed  by  the  board,  which  fee  shall 
not  exceed  the  sum  of  two  dollars.  All  certificates  so  issued 
shall  expire  on  the  thirty-first  day  of  May  in  each  year,  and 
shall  be  prima  facit  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder  thereof 


304  APPENDIX. 

to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State  during  the  time  for  which 
they  were  issued.  Any  certificate  or  license  granted  hy  said 
board  may  be  revoked  by  the  board,  upon  conviction  of  the 
party  holding  it,  of  a  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  Act.  Every  person  receiving  such  certificate  shall  con- 
spicuously expose  the  same  in  his  place  of  business. 

Sec.  5.  Any  person  having  pursued  the  study  of  den- 
tistry in  the  office,  or  under  the  supervision  of  some  regularly 
practicing  dentist,  for  at  least  three  years  before  applying  for 
such  examination,  not  lawfully  entitled  to  practice  dentistry 
at  the  time  when  this  Act  shall  take  effect,  who  shall  there- 
after desire  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  shall  appear  be- 
fore said  board  and  be  examined  with  reference  to  his  knowl- 
edge and  skill  in  dentistry,  and  if,  upon  such  examination, 
such  person  be  found,  in  the  judgment  of  said  board,  to 
possess  suitable  qualifications  to  practice  dentistry,  and,  if  the 
board  shall  be  satisfied  that  the  applicant  has  a  good  moral 
character,  it  shall  issue  to  such  person  a  license  to  practice 
dentistry  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act;  pro- 
vided,  that  any  person  desiring  to  commence  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  State,  and  having  a  diploma  issued  or  pur- 
porting to  be  issued  by  any  reputable  dental  college  or  dental 
department  of  any  university,  shall  present  the  same  to  the 
State  Board  of  Examiners,  and  said  board,  being  satisfied  as 
to  the  genuineness  of  the  diploma  and  the  qualifications  of 
the  applicant,  shall  issue  a  license  to  such  person  to  practice 
dentistry  in  this  State  without  examination,  on  payment  of 
the  license  fee  hereinafter  provided  for.  All  licenses  issued 
by  said  board  shall  be  signed  by  the  several  members  thereof, 
and  be  attested  by  its  President  and  Secretary,  and  the  seal 
of  said  board. 

Sec.  6.  Any  member  of  said  board  may  issue  a  tempo- 
rary license  to  any  applicant,  upon  the  presentation  by  such 
applicant  of  satisfactory  evidence  that  he  possesses  the  neces- 
sary qualifications  to  practice  dentistry,  on  the  payment  of 
ten  dollars,  which  license  shall  remain  in  force  until  the  semi- 
annual meeting  of  said  board  occurring  next  thereafter,  and 
no  longer;  but  such  license  shall  not  be  renewed,  nor  shall  it 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  305 

be  granted  to  any  applicant  who  has,  within  six  months  pre- 
vious to  his  application,  been  rejected  by  said  board.  Such 
license  shall  not  be  valid  until  it  shall  be  attested  by  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  board,  under  its  seal,  and  the  Secretary  shall 
keep  a  record  of  such  licenses,  the  date  of  their  issue,  and  the 
name  of  the  members  by  whom  each  license  was  issued. 

Sec.  7.  Any  person  shall  be  regarded  as  practicing  den- 
tistry within  the  meaning  of  this  Act,  who  shall  perform  upon 
the  human  teeth,  or  parts  adjacent  thereto,  any  operation  or 
operations  such  as  are  commonly  known  and  designated  as 
dental  operations,  or  operations  in  dental  surgery ;  or  who 
shall  hold  himself  or  herself  out,  by  means  of  signs,  cards, 
advertisements,  or  otherwise,  as  a  dentist  or  dental  surgeon. 
Any  legally  qualified  practitioner  of  dentistry  who  has  com- 
plied with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  any  properly  organ- 
ized and  equipped  and  reputable  dental  college,  or  dental 
department  of  any  reputable  school  or  university,  may  take 
into  preceptorship  a  student  or  students  who  shall  be  per- 
mitted to  perform  such  operations  in  the  offices  or  infirmaries 
of  such  preceptors  and  under  their  immediate  supervision,  and 
not  otherwise  :  during  the  term  of  three  years  from  the  com- 
mencement of  such  pupilage,  and  no  longer,  unless  for  special 
reasons  such  time  shall,  in  the  discretion  of  the  board,  be 
thereafter  extended  for  a  period  not  exceeding  one  year ;  pro- 
vided, nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  any 
legally  qualified  resident  physician  and  surgeon  from  extract- 
ing teeth,  or  to  prevent  any  person  from  using  any  domestic 
remed\r  or  other  proper  means  for  the  relief  of  pain  in  case 
of  an  emergency. 

Sec.  8.  In  order  to  provide  means  for  carrying  into  effect 
and  maintaining  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  said  Board  of 
Dental  Examiners  may  require  each  person  appearing  before 
it  for  examination,  as  aforesaid,  to  pay  said  board  a  fee  not 
<  weeding  ten  dollars,  which  shall  in  no  case  he  returned  to 
such  applicant ;  and  if  the  applicant  shall  receive  a  license  to 
practice,  he  shall  thereupon  pay  the  further  sum  of  five  dol- 
lars, which  shall  entitle  him  to  receive  also  a  certificate  of 
registration  as  a  practitioner  of  dentistry  in  this  State  for  the 


300  APPENDIX. 

current  or  registration  year  in  which  such  license  Bhall  be 
issued,  alter  the  termination  of  which  he  shall  annually  ob- 
tain a  certifieate  as  hereinbefore  provided.  All  moneys  re- 
ceived by  the  board  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary  thereof  as 
a  special  fund  for  paying  the  necessary  expenses  and  the  com- 
pensation  of  the  board  and  its  Secretary,  as  herein  provided, 
and  for  enforcing  the  provisions  of  this  Acl  ;  and  the  Secre- 
tary shall  give  such  bond  as  the  board  may  from  time  to 
time  require.  Xo  part  of  the  salaries  or  other  expenses  of 
the  board  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  State  treasury,  but  the 
annual  report  of  the  board  shall  be  printed  by  the  State.  The 
Secretary  of  the  board  shall  receive  a  salary  which  shall  be 
fixed  by  the  board,  in  addition  to  the  necessary  and  legiti- 
mate expenses  by  him  incurred  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties,, 
and  each  member  of  the  board  shall  receive  as  compensation 
the  sum  of  five  dollars  per  day  for  each  day  actually  enployed 
by  him  in  attending  meetings,  or  in  performing  any  special 
duty  assigned  to  him  by  the  board,  and  shall  be  reimbursed 
for  all  legitimate  and  necessary  expenses  by  him  incurred  in 
the  performance  of  any  official  duty.  Said  board  shall,  on 
or  before  the  first  day  of  December  in  each  year,  make  an 
annual  report  of  its  acts  and  proceedings  to  the  Governory 
which  report  shall  contain,  among  other  things,  an  accurate 
statement  of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed  during  the 
previous  year. 

Sec.  9.  Any  violations  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  shall  subject  the  part}'  violating  the  same  to  a  penalty 
of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars,  nor  more  than  fifty  dollars, 
for  the  first  offense  ;  of  not  less  than  fifty  dollars,  nor  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars,  for  the  second  offense,  and  of  not 
less  than  one  hundred  dollars,  nor  more  than  two  hundred  and 
fifty  dollars,  for  the  third  or  any  subsequent  offense,  and  such 
penalties  shall  be  sued  for  and  recovered  in  any  court  of  com- 
petent jurisdiction  in  the  name  of  the  people  by  the  State's- 
attorney  of  the  county  wherein  such  offense  shall  have  been 
committed,  or  in  which  the  offender  may  be  found,  and  said 
penalty,  when  recovered,  shall  be  paid  into  the  common 
school  fund  of  the  county  in  which  the  suit  shall  be  brought ; 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  307 

and  in  ease  of  the  non-payment  of  such  penalty,  the  party  so 
offending  shall  be  liable  to  imprisonment  for  a  period  not  ex- 
ceeding six  months,  in  the  discretion  of  the  court  having 
cognizance  thereof;  provided,  that  either  party  may  appeal 
in  the  same  time  and  manner  as  appeals  may  be  taken  in 
other  cases,  except  that  where  an  appeal  is  prayed  in  behalf 
of  the  people,  no  appeal  bond  shall  be  required  to  be  filed, 
whether  the  appeal  be  from  a  Justice  of  the  Peace  or  from 
the  County  or  District  Court,  or  from  the  Appellate  Court. 
But  it  shall  be  sufficient  in  behalf  of  the  people  of  the  State 
of  ISTorth  Dakota,  for  the  use  of  the  Board  of  Dental  Ex- 
aminers, to  pray  an  appeal,  and  thereupon  an  appeal  may  be 
had  without  bond  or  security ;  provided  further,  that  no  pro- 
ceeding shall  be  commenced  against  any  party  for  failure  to 
procure  the  annual  certificate  of  registration  provided  for  in 
section  4,  until  after  such  party  shall  have  been  served  with 
proper  notice  of  such  failure,  and  the  penalty  thereby  in- 
curred. Every  operation  performed  and  each  patient  treated,, 
contrary  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  and 
held  as  a  separate  offense. 

Sec.  10.  Any  person  who  shall  willfully  and  falsely  claim 
or  pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  license  or  registra- 
tion of  this  board,  or  of  any  similiar  board  of  any  other 
State,  or  who  shall  willfully  and  falsely,  with  intent  to  de- 
ceive the  public,  claim  or  pretend  to  be  a  graduate  of  or  hold 
a  diploma  granted  by  any  incorporated  dental  society  or 
dental  college,  shall  be  subject  to  the  penalties  provided  for  in 
section  9  of  this  Act,  to  be  sued  for  and  recovered  and  paid 
out  as  in  said  section  provided. 

Sec.  11.  All  laws  or  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  with  this 
Act  are  hereby  repealed. 

Approved  February  6th,  1890. 


308  APPENDIX. 


OHIO. 


A  Law  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Ohio. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Ohio,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to 
practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Ohio  for  compensation,  un- 
less such  person  has  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of 
a  dental  college  duly  incorporated  under  the  laws  of  this  or 
any  other  State  of  the  United  States  or  foreign  country,  or  a 
certificate  of  qualification  issued  by  the  State  Dental  Society 
or  by  any  local  society  auxiliary  thereto  ;  provided,  that  noth- 
ing in  this  section  shall  apply  to  persons  now  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State  before  the  first  day  of 
January,  1873. 

Sec.  2.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  dentistry  without 
having  complied  with  the  regulations  of  this  Act,  shall  be 
deemedguilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction  thereof, 
shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  two  hundred 
dollars  ;  ])rovided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed 
to  prevent  physicians  and  surgeons  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec  3.  All  prosecutions  under  this  Act  shall  be  by  in- 
dictment before  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  in  the  county 
where  the  offense  was  committed,  and  all  fines  imposed  and 
collected  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  paid  into 
the  treasury  of  the  county  where  such  conviction  shall  take 
place,  for  the  use  of  the  common  schools  within  such  county. 

Sec  4.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  passage. 

The  above  Act  was  passed  May  8th,  1868,  but  was  after- 
wards amended,  as  follows : 

An  Act  to  amend  Section  one  of  an  Act  entitled  'An  Act  to  Regu- 
late the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Ohio"  passed 
May  8th,  1868. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Ohio,  That  section  1  of  the  above-named  Act  be  so 
amended  as  to  read  as  follows :  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  309 

an\'  person  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Ohio  for  com- 
pensation, unless  such  person  has  received  a  diploma  from  the 
faculty  of  a  dental  college  duly  incorporated  under  the  laws 
of  this  or  any  State  of  the  United  States  or  foreign  country, 
or  a  certificate  of  qualification  issued  hy  the  State  Dental 
Society  ;  provided,  that  in  all  cases  where  any  person  has  been 
continuously  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  for  a  period 
of  five  years  or  more,  such  person  shall  be  considered  to  have, 
complied  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act  and  the  Act  to. 
which  this  is  amendatory. 

Sec.  2.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  dentistry  without 
having  complied  with  the  regulations  of  this  Act,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction  thereof, 
shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  two 
hundred  dollars  ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be 
construed  to  prevent  physicians  and  surgeons  from  extracting 
teeth. 

Sec.  3.  All  prosecutions  under  this  Act  shall  be  by  indict- 
ment before  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  in  the  county  where 
the  offense  was  committed,  and  all  fines  imposed  and  collected 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  paid  into  the  treas- 
ury of  the  county  where  such  conviction  shall  take  place,  for 
the  use  of  the  common  schools  within  such  county. 

Sec  4.  That  said  original  section  1  be  and  is  hereby  re- 
pealed. 

Sec  5.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  passage. 

Passed  March  10th,  1873. 


OKLAHOMA. 


Following  is  the  Text  of  the  Law  which  went  into  effect  Decem- 
ber 25th,  1890. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the 
Territory  of  Oklahoma,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any 
person  to  practice  or  attempt  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental 


310  APPENDIX. 

surgery  in  the  Territory  of  Oklahoma  without  having  first 
received  a  license  from  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  as 
hereinafter  provided. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  is  hereby  created, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purpose  and  enforce 
the  provisions  of  this  Act.  The  members  of  such  board  shall 
be  appointed  by  the  Governor,  and  shall  consist  of  five  prac- 
ticing dentists,  residents  of  Oklahoma  Territory,  who  shall 
have  been  engaged  in  the  continuous  practice  of  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  for  at  least  two  years  prior  to  the  passage  of 
this  Act.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such 
vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor. 

Sec  3.  Said  board  shall  keep  a  record,  in  which  shall 
be  registered  the  names  and  residence  and  place  of  business 
of  all  persons  authorized  under  this  Act  to  practice  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery  in  this  Territory.  It  shall  elect  one  of  its 
members  as  President,  one  as  Secretary,  and  one  as  Treasurer 
thereof,  which  election  shall  hold  during:  the  term  for  which 
the  incumbent  was  appointed,  or  during  his  or  her  residence 
in  the  Territory.  It  shall  meet  at  least  once  in  each  year, 
and  as  much  oftener,  and  at  such  times  and  places  as  it  may 
deem  necessary.  A  majority  of  such  board  shall,  at  all  times, 
constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  proceedings  thereof  shall,  at  all 
reasonable  times,  be  open  for  public  inspection. 

Sec.  4.  Every  person  who  holds  a  diploma  from  a  re- 
cognized college  of  dentistry,  or  who  was  engaged  in  the  prac- 
tice of  dental  surgery  in  the  Territory  three  months  previous 
to  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  who  has  been  regularly  en- 
gaged in  the  practice  of  dentistiy  for  three  years  next  pre- 
ceding the  passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  within  six  months  there- 
after, cause  his  or  her  name,  residence,  and  place  of  business 
to  be  registered  with  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  and  pay 
the  fee  hereinafter  provided,  whereupon  the  board  shall  issue 
a  license  duly  signed  by  a  majority  of  said  board,  and  such 
license  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the  holder 
thereof  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  Territory 
of  Oklahoma. 

Sec.  5.  Any  person  desiring  to  commence  the  practice 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  311 

of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  Territory  of  Oklahoma 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  before  commencing  such 
practice,  file  for  record,  in  a  book  kept  for  that  purpose,  with 
said  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  his  or  her  diploma,  or  a 
duly  authenticated  copy  thereof,  and  pay  the  fee  as  herein- 
after provided,  whereupon  the  said  board  shall  issue  to  such 
person  a  license,  the  same  as  provided  in  section  4  of  this 
Act ;  provided,  however,  that  any  person  who  shall  pass  a 
satisfactory  examination  before  the  said  board  regarding  his 
or  her  qualifications  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery, 
and  pay  the  fee  as  hereinafter  provided,  shall  also  be  granted 
a  license  as  provided  in  section  4  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  6.  To  provide  for  the  proper  and  effective  enforce- 
ment of  this  Act,  said  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  be 
entitled  to  the  following  fees,  to  wit :  For  each  license  issued 
to  persons  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  sur- 
gery in  this  Territory  three  months  previous  to  the  passage 
of  this  Act,  the  sum  of  three  dollars ;  for  each  license  issued 
to  persons  not  engaged  in  such  practice  three  months  pre- 
vious to  such  passage,  the  sum  of  ten  dollars. 

Sec.  7.  The  members  of  said  board  shall  each  receive 
the  compensation  of  three  dollars  per  day  for  each  and  every 
day  actually  engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office,  which, 
together  with  all  other  legitimate  expenses  incurred  in  the 
performance  of  such  duties,  shall  be  paid  from  fees  received 
by  the  board  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  no  part 
of  the  expenses  of  said  board  shall  at  any  time  be  paid  out  of 
the  Territorial  treasury.  All  moneys  in  excess  of  said  per 
diem  allowances  and  other  expenses  shall  be  held  by  the 
Treasurer  of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  the  ex- 
penses  of  said  board,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board  shall 
from  time  to  time  direct,  and  such  board  shall  make  an 
annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the 
fifteenth  day  of  December  of  each  year,  together  with  an 
account  of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them  in  pur- 
suance of  this  Act. 

8eo.  8.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  this  Act  by  prac- 
ticing or  attempting  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surger}r 


312  SlPPBNDix. 

in  this  Territory  without  first  complying  with  the  provisions 
of  this  Act,  shall  he  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and, 
upon  conviction  thereof,  shall  be  fined  in  a  sum  not  less  than 
twenty-five  dollars,  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  or 
by  confinement  in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than  six 
months,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment,  in  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  court;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall 
be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  physicians  and  surgeons  or 
other  persons  from  extracting  teeth,  and  all  fines  collected 
under  this  Act  shall  belong  to  the  common  school  fund  of 
the  county  where  the  offense  was  committed. 

This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from  and  after 
the  final  adjournment  of  this  legislative  assembly. 


PENNSYLVANIA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  to  Protect  the 
People  against  Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State 
of  Pennsylvania,  and  Providing  Penalties  for  the  Violation 
of  the  Seime. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  Souse  of  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania,  in  General 
Assembly  met,  and  it  is  hereby  enacted  by  the  authority  of  the  same, 
That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  un- 
lawful for  any  person  except  regularly  authorized  physicians 
and  surgeons  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania,  unless  said  person  has  graduated  and 
received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  reputable  institution 
where  this  specialty  is  taught,  and  chartered  under  the  au- 
thority of  some  one  of  the  United  States  or  of  a  foreign 
government,  acknowledged  as  such,  or  shall  have  obtained  a 
certificate  from  a  Board  of  Examiners  duly  appointed  and 
authorized  by  the  provisions  of  this  Act  to  issue  such  cer- 
tificate. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  313 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  consist  of  six 
practitioners  of  dentistry  who  are  of  acknowledged  ability 
in  the  profession.  Said  board  shall  be  elected  by  the  Penn- 
sylvania State  Dental  Society  at  their  next  annual  meeting, 
as  follows :  Two  shall  be  elected  for  one  year,  two  for  two 
years,  and  two  for  three  years,  and  each  year  thereafter  two 
shall  be  elected  to  serve  for  three  years,  or  until  their  suc- 
cessors are  elected.  The  said  board  shall  have  power  to  fill 
all  vacancies  for  unexpired  terms,  and  they  shall  be  responsi- 
ble to  said  State  Dental  Society  for  their  acts. 

Sec  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  First,  To 
meet  annually  at  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania State  Dental  Society,  and  at  such  other  time  and  place 
as  the  said  board  shall  agree  upon,  to  conduct  the  examina- 
tion of  applicants.  They  shall  also  meet  for  the  same  pur- 
pose at  the  call  of  any  four  members  of  said  board  at  such 
time  and  place  as  may  be  designated.  Thirty  days'  notice 
must  be  given  of  the  meetings  by  advertising  in  at  least  three 
periodicals,  one  of  them  being  a  dental  journal,  and  all  pub- 
lished within  this  State.  Secondly,  To  grant  a  certificate  of 
ability  to  practice  dentistry,  which  certificate  shall  be  signed 
by  said  board,  and  stamped  with  a  suitable  seal,  to  all  appli- 
cants who  undergo  a  satisfactory  examination,  and  who  re- 
ceive at  least  four  affirmative  votes.  Thirdly,  To  keep  a 
book  in  which  shall  be  registered  the  names  and  the  qualifi- 
cations, as  far  as  practicable,  of  all  persons  who  have  been 
granted  certificates  of  ability  to  jDractice  dentistry  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec  4.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has 
it  in  keeping,  with  the  seal  of  said  Board  of  Examiners,  shall 
be  evidence  in  any  court  of  this  State. 

Sec  5.  That  four  members  of  this  board  shall  constitute 
a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business ;  and  should  a 
quorum  not  be  present  on  any  day  appointed  for  their  meet- 
ing, those  present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until  a 
quorum  is  present. 


314  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  6.  That  any  person  who  shall  in  violation  of  this 
Act  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  shall  be 
liable  to  indictment  in  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  of  the 
proper  county,  and,  on  conviction,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than 
fifty  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars ;  provided,  that  any 
person  so  convicted  shall  not  be  entitled  to  any  fee  for  ser- 
vices rendered  ;  and  if  a  fee  shall  have  been  paid,  the  patient 
or  his  or  her  heirs  may  recover  the  same  as  debts  of  like 
amount  are  now  recoverable  by  law. 

Sec.  7.  That  all  fines  collected  shall  inure  to  the  poor 
fund  of  the  county  in  which  the  prosecution  occurs. 

Sec.  8.  That  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  apply  to  persons 
who  shall  have  been  engaged  in  the  continuous  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  State  for  three  years  or  over  at  the  time  of 
or  prior  to  the  passage  ol  this  Act. 

Sec  9.  That  to  provide  a  fund  to  carry  out  the  pro- 
visions of  the  third  section  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  the  duty 
of  the  said  Board  of  Examiners  to  collect  from  those  who 
receive  the  certificate  to  practice  dentistry  the  sum  of  thirty 
(30)  dollars  each,  of  which  sum,  if  there  be  any  remaining 
after  liquidating  necessaiy  expenses,  the  balance  shall  be 
paid  into  the  treasury  of  the  said  Pennsylvania  State  Dental 
Society,  to  be  kept  as  a  fund  for  the  more  perfect  carrying 
out  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Signed  April  17th,  1876. 

Supplementary  to  the  foregoing  Act  is  the  following 
Act  in  reference  to  the  registration  of  dentists : 

An  Act  for  the  Registration  of  Dentists,  Supplementary  to  the 
Act  Entitled  uAn  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry, 
and  to  Protect  the  People  Against  Empiricism  in  Relation 
Thereto,  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Providing 
Penalties  for  the  Same." 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania,  in  General 
Assembly  met,  and  it  is  hereby  enacted  by  the  authority  of  the 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  315 

same,  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  any  person  practicing 
dentistry  within  this  Commonwealth  within  three  months 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  of  any  person  intending  to 
practice  dentistry  within  this  Commonwealth,  before  com- 
mencing the  same,  to  have  recorded  in  the  Recorder's  Office 
in  the  county  in  which  he  or  she  practices  or  intends  to 
practice,  the  diploma  or  certificate  provided  for  in  the  Act 
to  which  this  is  a  supplement. 

Sec  2.  Any  person  beginning  to  practice  dentistry  in 
this  State  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  having  a  dental 
diploma  issued  or  purporting  to  have  been  issued  by  any 
college,  university,  society,  or  association,  shall  present  the 
same  to  the  State  Examining  Board  provided  for  in  the  Act 
to  which  this  is  a  supplement  for  approval ;  such  Examining 
Board,  being  satisfied  as  to  the  qualifications  of  the  appli- 
cant and  the  genuineness  of  the  diploma,  shall,  without  fee, 
indorse  the  same  as  approved,  after  which  the  same  may  be 
recorded  as  aforesaid. 

Sec  3.  Any  person  who  is  entitled  to  practice  dentistry 
in  this  Commonwealth  without  a  diploma  or  certificate, 
under  the  provisions  of  the  eighth  section  of  the  Act  to 
which  this  is  a  supplement,  shall  make  written  affidavit  be- 
fore some  person  qualified  to  administer  an  oath,  setting 
forth  the  time  of  his  continuous  practice,  and  the  place  or 
places  where  such  practice  was  pursued  in  this  Common- 
wealth, and  shall,  within  three  months  after  the  passage  of 
this  Act,  have  such  affidavit  recorded  in  the  Recorder's  Office 
of  the  county  in  which  he  is  practicing ;  and  it  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  Recorder  to  record  such  diplomas,  certificates 
and  affidavits  in  a  book  provided  for  such  purposes. 

Sec  4.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  or  fail  to  comply 
with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  or  of  the  Act  to  which 
this  is  a  supplement,  or  who  shall  cause  to  be  recorded  any 
diploma  or  certificate  which  has  been  obtained  fraudulently, 
or  is  in  whole  or  in  part  a  forgery,  or  shall  make  affidavit  to 
any  false  statement  to  be  recorded  as  aforesaid,  shall  be 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and, on  conviction,  shall  be  sentenced 


316  APPENDIX. 

to  pay  a  line  of  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  two  hundred 
dollars  for  each  offense  for  the  use  of  the  proper  county. 

Sec.  5.  All  Acts  or  parts  of  Acts  inconsistent  herewith 
are  hereby  repealed. 

Approved  June  20th,  1883. 


RHODE  ISLAND. 


The  following  is  an  "Act  to  Establish  a  Board  of  Registration 
in  Dentistry  for  the  State  of  Rhode  Island  and  Providence 
Plantations,"  passed  June  1st,  1888: 

Section  1.  R  is  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  as  fol- 
lows: The  Governor  of  the  State  shall,  on  the  passage  of 
this  Act,  appoint  five  graduates  in  dentistry  residing  and  do- 
ing business  within  the  State,  who  shall  constitute  a  Board 
of  Registration  in  dentistry.  The  term  for  which  such  mem- 
bers shall  hold  their  office  shall  be  three  years ;  except  that 
one  of  the  members  first  appointed  under  this  Act  shall  hold 
his  office  for  one  year,  two  for  the  term  of  two  years,  and 
two  for  the  term  of  three  years  respectively,  and  until  their 
successors  shall  be  duly  appointed.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  oc- 
curring in  said  board,  it  shall  be  filled  by  the  Governor  in 
conformity  with  this  section. 

Sec  2.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members  Presi- 
dent and  one  Secretary  thereof,  and  three  of  its  members 
shall  constitute  a  quorum.  It  shall  meet  at  least  once  a  year, 
or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  three  members. 

Sec.  3.  Within  three  months  from  the  time  of  the  pas- 
sage of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  at  that  time  in  the  State  to  cause 
his  or  her  name  and  place  of  business  to  be  registered  with 
said  board,  who  shall  keep  a  book  for  that  purpose  ;  and  per- 
sons so  registering  shall  receive  a  certificate  to  that  effect 
from  the  board. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  317 

Sec.  4.  All  persons,  not  graduates  of  regular  dental  col- 
leges, who  may  desire  to  enter  the  practice  of  dentistry  in 
this  State,  subsequent  to  the  passage  of  this  Act,  may  appear 
before  said  board  and  be  examined  with  reference  to  their 
knowledge  and  skill  in  dentistry ;  and  to  such  as  undergo  a 
satisfactory  examination  certificates  to  that  effect,  signed  by 
said  board,  shall  be  issued.  All  persons  holding  diplomas 
from  reputable  dental  colleges  may  present  the  same  to  said 
board,  and,  on  such  presentation,  shall  receive  certificates  with- 
out examination. 

Sec  5.  Each  person  receiving  a  certificate  shall  pay  to 
said  board  the  sum  of  $2.00,  and  each  person  applying  for  an 
examination  shall  pay,  in  addition  to  the  fee  for  certificate, 
if  granted,  twenty-five  dollars,  which  shall  in  no  case  be  re- 
turned. The  fees  received  for  examinations,  registration, 
and  certificates,  shall  be  appropriated  to  defray  the  expenses 
of  the  Board  of* Registration  in  dentistry. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  or  attempt  to 
practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  in  violation  of  the  provisions 
of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  misdemeanor  and  liable 
to  indictment  therefor,  and,  upon  conviction,  shall  be  fined  not 
less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  for  each  and 
every  offense;  and  such  person's  failure  to  duly  register  with 
the  Board  of  Registration  in  dentistry  shall  be  evidence  of 
such  violation. 

Sec.  7.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  upon  its  passage. 


SOUTH  CAROLINA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  Protect  the 
People  against  Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto,  in  the  State 
of  South  Carolina. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  now  met  and  sitting 
in  General  Assembly,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,   That 


318  APPENDIX. 

from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for 
any  person,  or  persons,  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  unless  said  person,  or  persons, 
shall  have  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  some  den- 
tal college,  duly  incorporated  under  the  laws  of  this  or  some 
other  State  in  the  United  States,  or  foreign  Government,  in 
which  is  annually  delivered,  in  good  faith,  a  full  course  of 
lectures  and  instructions  in  dentistry,  or  shall  have  obtained 
a  license,  from  a  Board  of  Dentists,  duly  authorized  and  ap- 
pointed by  this  Act  to  issue  such  license. 

Sec.  2.  It  shall  he  the  duty  of  the  South  Carolina  State 
Dental  Association,  at  the  next  annual  meeting  thereof,  after 
the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  elect  a  Board  of  Examiners,  to 
consist  of  five  members,  to  be  known  by  the  title  of  the  Board 
of  Dental  Examiners  in  the  State  of  South  Carolina.  The 
members  of  this  board  shall,  at  the  first  election,  be  elected 
for  terms  of  one,  two,  three,  four  and  five  years,  respectively, 
or  until  their  successors  shall  have  been  elected.  And  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  South  Carolina  State  Dental  Asso- 
ciation, at  each  subsequent  annual  meeting  thereof,  to  elect 
a  person  for  the  term  of  five  years,  to  fill  the  place  of  the 
member  of  the  board  whose  term  of  office  shall  at  that  time 
expire,  and  also  to  fill  such  vacancies  in  the  board  as  may 
have  occurred  during  the  year.  And  if,  at  any  regular  meet- 
ing of  the  board,  any  member,  or  members,  shall  fail  to  be 
present,  the  South  Carolina  State  Dental  Association  may,  at 
its  discretion,  declare  the  office  of  such  absentee  to  be  vacated, 
and  may  proceed  to  elect  a  new  member,  or  members,  for  the 
unexpired  term  of  such  person,  or  persons,  or  it  may  elect  a 
member,  or  members,  to  fill,  temporarily,  the  place,  or  places, 
of  such  absentees.  This  board  shall  be  organized  by  the 
election  of  a  President  and  a  Secretary. 

Sec.  3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  First, 
to  meet,  annually,  at  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  South 
Carolina  State  Dental  Association,  giving  thirty  days'  notice 
in  the  public  newspapers,  published  in  not  less  than  three 
different  places  of  the  State,  viz.  :  one  in  Charleston,  one  in 
Columbia,  and  one  in  Greenville,  of  such  annual  meeting. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  319 

Secondly,  to  prescribe  a  course  of  reading  for  those  who  study 
dentistry  under  private  instructions.  Thirdly,  to  grant  a 
license  to  any  applicant  who  shall  furnish  satisfactory  evi- 
dence of  having  graduated,  and  received  a  diploma  from  any 
incorporated  dental  eolleg  e  in  good  standing  with  the  pro- 
fession, without  fee,  charge,  or  examination.  Fourthly,  to 
grant  licenses  to  all  other  applicants  who  undergo  a  satisfac- 
tory examination.  Fifthly,  to  keep  a  book  in  which  shall 
be  registered  all  persons  licensed  to  practice  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  South  Carolina.  The  expenses  of  said  license  shall 
be  fifteen  dollars,  to  be  paid  by  the  licensee.  And  that  all 
persons  who  do  now  hold,  or  may  hereafter  hold,  a  license 
to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  shall  become  members  of 
the  South  Carolina  State  Dental  Association,  immediately 
upon  the  obtaining  of  said  license  ;  provided,  he  shall  be  al- 
lowed to  waive  his  right  of  membership. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  a  transcript  from  it,  certified  by  the  officer  who  has  it  in 
keeping,  with  the  common  seal,  shall  be  evidence  in  any 
court  of  the  State. 

Sec.  5.  That  three  members  of  said  board  shall  consti- 
tute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  should  a 
quorum  not  be  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  their  meet- 
ing, those  present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until  a 
quorum  is  present. 

Sec.  6.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
license  to  an  applicant  to  practice  until  the  next  regular 
meeting  of  the  board,  when  he  shall  report  the  fact,  at 
which  time  the  temporary  license  shall  expire ;  but  such 
temporary  license  shall  not  be  granted  by  a  member  of  the 
board  after  the  board  has  rejected  the  applicant. 

Sec  7.  That  every  dentist  in  this  State  be  required  to 
keep  a  record  of  all  cases  treated  in  his  practice,  in  accord- 
ance with  a  form  to  be  designated  by  the  South  Carolina 
State  Dental  Association,  and  furnish  his  patient  with  a 
copy  of  the  same,  if  so  desired  by  the  patient. 

Sec  8.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this 
Act,  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  for 


320  APPENDIX. 

fee,  or  reward,  shall  be  liable  to  indictment,  ami,  on  convic- 
tion, shall  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  three 
hundred  dollars  ;  provided,  that  nothing;  in  this  Act  shall  be 
so  construed  as  to  prevent  any  person  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  9.  That  on  trial  of  such  indictment,  it  shall  be  in- 
cumbent on  the  defendant  to  show  that  he  has  authority,  un- 
der the  law,  to  practice  dentistry,  to  exempt  himself  from 
such  penalty. 

Sec.  10.  That  all  fines  collected  shall  inure  to  the  edu- 
cational fund  of  the  county  where  the  offender  resides. 

Sec  11.  That  those  who  have  been  in  the  regular  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  in  the  State,  prior  to  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  are  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  the  same,  except  sec- 
tion 7  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  12.  That  the  South  Carolina  State  Dental  Associa- 
tion is  hereby  made  a  body  politic  and  corporate,  shall  have 
and  use  a  common  seal,  sue  and  be  sued,  plead  and  be  im- 
pleaded, and  be  empowered  to  make  all  necessary  by-laws 
not  inconsistent  with  the  State  Laws  and  Constitution. 

Sec.  13.  That  this  Act  shall  continue  in  force  until  re- 
pealed. 

Ap] .roved  February  23d,  1875. 


TENNESSEE. 


Following  is  the  Text  of  "An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of 
Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Tennessee,  and  to  Punish  Violators 
thereof^  enacted  March  23d,  1891. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Tennessee,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person 
to  practice,  or  attempt  to  practice,  dentistry  or  dental  surgery 
in  the  State  of  Tennessee  without  first  having  received  a  di- 
ploma from  some  reputable  dental  college,  school,  or  univer- 
sity department,  duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of  this  State, 
or  some  other  of  the  United  States,  and  in  which  college,  or 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  321 

school,  or  university  department  there  are,  at  the  time  of  issu- 
ance of  such  diploma,  annually  delivered  a  full  course  of  lec- 
tures and  instructions  in  dentistry  and  dental  surgery ;  pro- 
vided, that  nothing  in  section  1  of  this  Act  shall  apply  to 
any  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery  in  the  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act, 
except  as  hereinafter  provided  ;  and  provided,  further,  That 
nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  phy- 
sicians, surgeons,  or  others  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners  consisting  of  six  practi- 
cing dentists  of  acknowledged  ability,  as  such,  two  of  whom 
shall  be  residents  in  each  of  the  three  sub-divisions  of  the 
State,  East,  Middle,  and  West  Tennessee,  is  hereby  created, 
who  shall  have  authority  to  issue  certificates  to  persons  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  State  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act ;  and  also  to  decide  upon  the 
validity  of  such  diplomas  as  ma}'  be  subsequently  presented 
for  registration,  as  hereinafter  provided,  and  issue  certificates 
to  all  applicants  who  may  hereafter  apply  to  said  board  and 
pass  a  satisfactory  examination. 

Sec  3.  The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed 
by  the  Governor,  and  shall  serve  for  a  term  of  three  years, 
excepting  that  the  members  of  the  board  first  appointed 
shall  be  made,  as  follows  :  Two  for  one  year,  two  for  two 
years,  and  two  for  three  years,  respectively,  and  until  their 
successors  are  duly  appointed.  In  case  of  vacancy  occurring 
in  said  board  by  resignation,  removal  from  State,  or  death, 
such  vacancy  may  be  filled  for  its  unexpired  term  by  the 
Governor  as  provided  by  this  Act. 

Sec.  4.  Said  board  shall  keep  a  record,  in  which  shall  be 
registered  the  names  and  residences,  or  places  of  business,  of 
all  persons  authorized  under  this  Act  to  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  in  this  State.  It  shall  elect  one  of  its  mem- 
bers President  and  one  Secretary  thereof;  and  it  shall  meet 
at  least  once  in  each  year,  at  the  time  and  place  fixed  for  the 
meeting  of  the  State  Dental  Association,  and  as  much  oftener 
and  at  such  times  and  places  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A 
majority  of  the  members  of  said   board  shall  constitute  a 


322  APPENDIX. 

quorum,  and  the  proceedings  thereof  shall  be  open  to  public 
inspection. 

Sec.  5.  Every  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery  within  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage 
of  this  Act,  shall,  within  six  months  thereafter,  cause  his  or 
her  name,  residence,  and  place  of  business  to  be  registered 
with  said  Board  of  Examiners,  upon  which  said  board  shall 
issue  to  such  person  a  certificate  duly  signed  by  a  majority 
of  the  members  of  said  board,  and  which  certificate  shall 
entitle  the  person  to  whom  it  is  issued  to  all  the  rights  and 
privileges  set  forth  in  section  1  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  desiring  to  commence  the  practice 
of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  within  this  State  after  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  before  commencing  such  practice, 
tile  for  record  in  a  book  kept  for  such  purposes  with  the 
said  Board  of  Examiners,  his  or  her  diploma,  orduly  authen- 
ticated copy  thereof,  the  validity  of  which  the  said  board  shall, 
have  the  power  to  determine.  If  accepted,  said  board  shall 
issue  to  the  person  holding  such  diploma  a  certificate,  duly 
signed  by  all  or  a  majority  of  the  members  of  said  board,, 
and  which  certificate  shall  entitle  the  person  to  whom  it  is 
issued  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  set  forth  in  section  1 
of  this  Act ;  provided,  that  any  person,  whether  holding  a 
diploma  aforesaid  or  not,  shall  have  the  privilege  of  making 
application  to  said  board,  and,  upon  undergoing  a  satisfac- 
tory examination,  shall  be  entitled  to  a  certificate  in  like 
manner  as  a  person  holding  a  diploma,  and  upon  the  same 
terms. 

Sec  7.  To  provide  for  the  proper  and  effective  enforce- 
ment of  this  Act,  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  entitled 
to  the  following  fees,  to-wit :  For  each  certificate  to  persons 
engaged  in  the  practice  in  the  State  at  the  time  of  the  pas- 
sage of  this  Act,  the  sum  of  one  dollar  ;  for  each  certificate 
issued  to  persons  not  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in 
the  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  the  sum  of 
five  dollars. 

Sec.  8.  The  members  of  said  Examining  Board  shall  re- 
ceive the  compensation  of  five  dollars  per  day  for  each  day 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  323 

actually  engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office,  which,  together 
with  all  other  legitimate  expenses,  incurred  in  the  perform- 
ance of  such  duties  shall  be  paid  from  the  fees  and  penalties 
received  by  the  board  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and 
no  part  of  the  expenses  of  said  board  shall  at  any  time  be 
paid  out  of  the  State  treasury.  All  moneys  in  excess  of 
said  per  diem  allowance  and  other  expenses  shall  be  held  by 
the  Secretary  of  the  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting 
the  expenses  of  said  board,  he  giving  such  bond  as  the  board 
may  from  time  to  time  direct,  and  said  board  shall  make  an 
annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Governor  by  the 
fifteenth  day  of  December  of  each  year,  together  with  an 
account  of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  them  in  the 
pursuance  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  this  Act  by  prac- 
ticing or  attempting  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery 
within  the  State,  without  first  complying  with  the  provi- 
sions of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor^ 
and,  upon  conviction  thereof,  shall  be  fined  in  a  sum  not  less 
than  twenty-five  nor  more  than  three  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  10.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  from  and  after  its 
passage,  the  public  welfare  demanding  it. 


TEXAS. 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State  of 

Texas. 
Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  Texas, 
That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  unlaw- 
ful for  any  person  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the 
State  of  Texas,  unless  said  person  has  obtained  license  from  a 
Board  of  Examiners,  duly  appointed  and  authorized  by  this 
Act  to  issue  such  license  ;  provided,  that  dentists  who  have 
been  in  the  regular  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State  for  three 
years  next  preceding  the  passage  of  this  Act,  shall  not  be  re- 


"-lit  APPENDIX. 

quired  to  submit  to  an  examination,  and  shall  !).•  entitled  to  a 
license,  without  fee,  which  shall  be  transmitted  to  him,  by 
mail  or  otherwise,  upon  application  accompanied  by  satis- 
factory evidence  to  the  fact  of  his  having  been  in  theregulai 

practice  for  the  time  required. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  appointed 
by  the  Judge  of  each  judicial  district,  and  shall  be  composed 
of  three  reputable  dentists,  residing  in  said  district,  who  shall 
liold  their  offices  two  years  from  the  date  of  appointment, 
-jind  any  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the  District  Judge,  as 
aforesaid. 

Sec.  o.  The  board  shall,  immediately  after  appointment, 
select  one  of  their  number  as  President  and  one  as  Secre- 
tary, and  adopt  all  rules  necessary  for  the  transaction  of  the 
"business  that  may  come  before  them. 

Sec.  4.  Said  board  shall  meet  annually  at  some  central 
point  in  their  resj  »ecti  ve  districts,  to  conduct  examinations  and 
grant  licenses.  Xotice  of  the  time  and  place  of  such  meeting 
shall  be  given,  for  one  month,  by  publication  in  some  newspa- 
per published  in  the  district! 

Sec.  5.  Any  applicant  who  shall  furnish  satisfactory  evi- 
dence of  having  graduated  and  received  a  diploma  from  any 
reputable  dental  college,  and  any  applicants  under  the  pro- 
visions of  the  first  section  of  this  Act,  and  all  other  appli- 
cants who  undergo  a  satisfactory  examination  as  to  their 
qualifications,  and  shall  pay  to  said  board  a  fee  of  five  dollars, 
to  be  used  for  the  advertising  and  incidental  expenses,  shall 
be  granted  license,  which  license  shall  entitle  the  person  to 
whom  granted  to  practice  dentistry  in  any  county  where  the 
same  has  been  recorded,  as  required  by  section  twelve. 

Sec  6.  Said  board  shall  keep  a  book  of  record,  in  which 
shall  be  registered  the  names  of  all  persons  licensed  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  by  said  board. 

Sec.  7.  The  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record,  and 
a  transcript  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has  it  in 
keeping,  with  the  common  seal  of  said  board,  shall  be  evi- 
dence in  any  court  in  this  State. 

Sec  8.  That  two  members  of  said  board  shall  consti- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  325- 

tute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  should  a 
quorum  be  not  present  on  the  day  appointed  for  its  meeting, 
the  member  present  may  adjourn,  from  day  to  day,  until  a 
quorum  be  present. 

Sec.  9.  That  one  member  of  said  board  may  grant  a 
license  for  an  applicant  to  practice,  until  the  next  regular 
meeting  of  the  board,  when  he  shall  report  the  fact,  at  which 
time  such  temporary  license  shall  expire  ;  but  such  tempo- 
rary license  shall  not  be  granted  by  a  member  of  the  board 
within  one  year  after  the  board  has  rejected  the  applicant. 

Sec  10.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  practice  dentistry  in  this  State  for  a 
fee  or  reward,  shall  be  liable  to  indictment,  and,  on  convic- 
tion, shall  be  fined  not  less  than  one  hundred  nor  more  than 
two  hundred  dollars;  nor  shall  it  be  construed  to  prevent 
persons  from  extracting  teeth,  nor  in  any  way  to  interfere 
with  physicians  and  surgeons  in  their  practice  of  such. 

Sec  11.  That  all  fines  collected  from  prosecutions  under 
this  Act  shall  be  appropriated  to  the  common  school  fund  in 
the  county  where  collected. 

Sec  12.  That  every  person  to  whom  license  is  issued  by 
said  Board  of  Examiners,  shall,  within  thirty  days  from  the 
date  thereof,  present  the  same  to  the  Clerk  of  the  county  in 
which  he  resides,  who  shall  officially  record  said  license  in  a 
book  in  his  office,  and  shall  be  entitled  to  demand  a  fee  of 
fifty  cents  for  his  services ;  but  a  temporary  license,  issued 
under  section  nine  of  this  Act,  need  not  be  recorded. 

Sec  13.  That  on  the  trial  of  any  person  indicted  under 
the  provisions  of  this  Act,  it  shall  be  incumbent  upon  the 
defendant,  in  order  to  exempt  him  from  the  penalties  of  this 
Act,  to  show  that  he  has  authority,  under  the  law,  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec  14.  That  all  laws  or  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  with 
tliis  Act  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  repealed. 

A]. proved  March  27th,  1889. 


326  APPENDIX. 


VERMONT. 


An  Act  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  State   of 

Vermont. 

Section  1.  It  is  hereby  enacted,  etc.,  There  shall  be  a 
Board  of  Dental  Examiners.  The  Board  shall  consist  of  five 
dental  graduates,  or  practitioners  of  dentistry,  to  be  appointed 
by  the  Governor,  in  the  month  of  November,  1882,  and  in 
the  month  of  November,  biennially,  thereafter.  The  term  ot 
office  of  members  so  appointed  shall  commence  on  the  first 
day  of  December  following  their  appointment,  and  continue 
for  two  years,  and  until  their  successors  are  appointed.  The 
Governor  shall  fill  vacancies  in  the  board. 

Sec.  2.  The  board  shall  meet  annually,  or  oftener.  Meet- 
ings shall  be  held  on  the  call  of  three  members.  Thirty  days' 
notice  of  each  meeting  shall  be  given,  by  mail,  to  each  prac- 
t  cing  dentist  in  the  State  known  to  the  board. 

Sec  3.  The  board  shall,  at  their  meetings,  examine  ap- 
plicants for  licenses  to  practice  dentistry,  and  shall  grant  a 
license  to  each  one  whom  they  find  qualified,  on  payment  to 
the  board  by  each  person,  the  sum  of  five  dollars.  The 
board  shall  grant  a  license  without  fee  to  any  person  who 
has  received  a  diploma  from  any  incorporated  dental  college, 
and  to  each  person  residing  and  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  within  the  State,  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  on  application  of  such  person,  accompanied  by  satisfac- 
tory proof  of  the  facts  which  entitle  him  to  such  license. 

Sec.  4.  Any  member  of  the  board  may,  when  the  board 
is  not  in  session,  grant  a  license  to  practice  dentistry  to  a 
person  whom  such  member  finds,  on  examination,  to  be 
qualified,  on  the  payment  of  the  sum  of  two  dollars  by  such 
person.  A  license  so  granted  shall  be  valid  until  the  next 
meeting  of  the  board,  but  no  longer.  Each  member  shall 
make  a  report  of  licenses  so  granted  by  him  at  the  meeting 
of  the  board  next  following  the  granting  of  the  license.  A 
member  shall  not  grant  a  license  under  the  provisions  of  this 
section  to  one  who  has  been  rejected  by  the  board  as  un- 
qualified. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  327 

Sec.  5.  Members  of  the  board  shall  receive  three  dollars, 
each,  a  day  for  time  spent  in  examining  applicants  and 
granting  licenses,  if  the  fees  received  from  applicants  during 
the  biennial  term,  in  which  such  services  are  rendered,  shall 
be  sufficient  therefor ;  and  at  the  end  of  each  biennial  term, 
the  board  shall  file  with  the  State  Auditor  a  statement  of 
their  receipts  and  disbursements,  verified  by  oath,  and  shall, 
at  the  same  time,  pay  into  the  State  treasury  any  excess 
remaining  in  their  hands. 

Sec.  6.  A  person  who,  without  a  license  in  force,  prac- 
tices dentistry  in  this  State  for  a  compensation,  or  reward, 
shall  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars,  nor  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars.  But  no  penalty  shall  attach  to  a 
person  for  merely  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  7.  The  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  keep  a 
book  in  which  they  shall  cause  to  be  entered  the  name  of 
each  person  to  whom  a  license  has  been  issued  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  A  person  receiving  a  license  from  the  Board  of 
Dental  Examiners  shall,  within  thirty  days  from  the  time 
of  receiving  the  same,  cause  it  to  be  recorded  in  the  office  of 
the  Secretary  of  State,  who  shall  be  entitled  to  twenty-five 
cents  for  recording  each  license. 

Sec  8.  A  person  who  does  not  cause  his  license  to  be 
recorded  within  the  time  required  by  the  preceding  section, 
shall  forfeit  the  license,  and  shall  not  be  re-licensed  until  he 
has  paid  to  the  board  the  sum  of  ten  dollars. 

Sec  10.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  from  its  passage, 
except  section  6,  which  shall  take  effect  on  the  first  day  of 
January,  1883. 

Approved  November  29th,  1882. 


I'.L'N  APPENDIX. 


VIRGINIA. 


The  Following  is  the  Text  of  An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of 
Dentistry  in  the  State  of  Virginia^  which  was  Approved 
February  06th,  1886. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  Vir- 
ginia, That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  it  shall 
be  unlawful  for  any  person,  except  regularly  authorized  phy- 
sicians and  surgeons,  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
in  the  Commonwealth  of  Virginia,  or  to  receive  license  from 
any  Commissioner  of  the  Revenue,  unless  such  person  has 
graduated  and  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  a  repu- 
table institution  where  this  specialty  is  taught,  and  char- 
tered under  the  authority  of  some  one  of  the  United  States, 
or  of  a  foreign  government,  acknowledged  as  such,  or  shall 
have  obtained  a  certificate  from  a  Board  of  Examiners  duly 
appointed  and  authorized  by  the  provisions  of  this  Act  to 
issue  such  certificates ;  provided,  that  nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  prevent  any  person  from  extracting  teeth  for  any 
one  suffering  from  toothache. 

Sec.  2.  That  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  consist  of  six 
practitioners  of  dentistry,  who  are  of  acknowledged  ability  in 
the  profession.  Said  board  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, who  shall  select  from  twelve  candidates  named  by  the 
Virginia  State  Dental  Association  at  their  next  annual  meet- 
ing, of  whom  two  shall  serve  one  year,  two  for  two  years, 
and  two  for  three  years,  and  to  reside  in  different  sections  of 
the  State ;  and  each  year  thereafter,  two  shall  be  appointed 
in  the  same  manner  from  four  nominees,  to  serve  for  three 
years  or  until  their  successors  are  elected.  All  vacancies  for 
unexpired  terms  shall  be  rilled  by  the  Governor  from  names 
furnished  him  by  the  board. 

Sec.  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board,  First, 
To  meet  annually  at  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  Vir- 
ginia State  Dental  Association,  and  at  such  other  time  and 
place  as  the  said  board  shall  agree  upon,  to  conduct  the  ex- 
amination of  applicants.     They  shall  also  meet  for  the  same 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  329 

purpose,  at  the  call  of  any  four  members  of  said  board,  at 
such  time  and  place  as  may  be  designated.  Thirty  days' 
notice  must  be  given  of  the  meetings  by  advertising  in  at 
least  two  of  the  daily  papers  published  in  the  Commonwealth 
of  Virginia.  Secondly,  To  grant  a  certificate  of  ability  to 
practice  dentistry,  which  certificate  shall  be  signed  by  said 
board  and  stamped  with  a  suitable  seal,  to  all  applicants  who 
undergo  a  satisfactory  examination  and  who  received  at  least 
four  affirmative  votes.  Thirdly,  To  keep  a  book  in  which 
shall  be  registered  the  names  and  qualifications,  as  far  as 
practicable,  of  all  persons  who  have  been  granted  certificates 
of  ability  to  practice  dentistry  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act. 

Sec.  4.  That  the  book  so  kept  shall  be  a  book  of  record, 
and  transcripts  from  it,  certified  to  by  the  officer  who  has  it 
in  keeping,  with  the  seal  of  said  Board  of  Examiners,  shall 
be  evidence  in  any  court  of  this  Commonwealth. 

Sec.  5.  That  four  members  of  this  board  shall  constitute 
a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business ;  and  should  a  quorum 
not  be  present  on  any  day  appointed  for  their  meeting,  those 
present  may  adjourn,  from  time  to  time,  until  a  quorum  is 
present. 

Sec  6.  That  any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of  this 
Act,  practice  dentistry  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Virginia, 
shall  be  liable  to  indictment  in  the  circuit,  county,  or  corpor- 
ation courts,  and,  on  conviction,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than 
fifty  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars ;  provided,  that  any 
person  so  convicted  shall  not  be  entitled  to  any  fee  for  ser- 
vices rendered  ;  and  if  a  fee  shall  have  been  paid,  the  patient 
or  his  or  her  heirs  may  recover  the  same  as  debts  of  like 
amount  are  now  recovered  by  law. 

Sec  7.  That  all  fines  collected  shall  inure  to  the  public 
school  fund  of  the  county  or  corporation  in  which  the  prose- 
cution occurs. 

m-c  8.  That  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  apply  to  persons 
who  shall  be  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this 


330  APPENDIX. 

Commonwealth  at  the  time  of,  or  prior  to,  the  passage  of 
this  Act. 

Sec.  9.  To  provide  a  fund  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of 
the  third  section  of  this  Act,  it  shall  he  the  duty  of  said 
Board  of  Examiners  to  collect  from  those  who  shall  appear 
before  them  for  examination  the  sum  of  ten  dollars  each. 

Sec.  10.  This  Act  shall  be  in  force  from  its  passage. 


WASHINGTON  TERRITORY. 

Following  is  the  text  of  uAn  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Den- 
tistry, and  to  Protect  the  People  against  Empiricism  in  Rela- 
tion thereto,  in  the  Territory  of  Washington : "  ' 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the 
Territory  of  Washington,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of 
this  Act,  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  the  Territory  of  "Washington,  unless 
said  person  has  graduated  and  received  a  diploma  from  the 
faculty  of  a  dental  college,  chartered  under  the  authority  of 
some  one  of  the  United  States  or  foreign  governments,  or 
shall  have  obtained  a  certificate  from  a  Board  of  Dentists, 
duly  authorized  and  appointed  by  the  provisions  of  this  Act 
to  issue  such  certificate. 

Sec  2.  That  a  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  consisting 
of  five  practicing  dentists,  be  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it 
shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions 
of  this  Act.  The  members  of  said  Board  of  Dental  Examin- 
ers shall  be  appointed  and  commissioned  by  the  Governor 
of  the  Territory.  Their  terms  of  office  shall  be  for  two  years, 
and  until  their  respective  successors  shall  be  duly  appointed 
and  commissioned.  All  vacancies  occurring  in  said  Board  of 
Examiners  may  be  filled  by  the  Governor  at  any  time.  The 
said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Governor 
on  or  before  the  first  Monday  in  February.  The  term  of 
office  shall  begin  the  first  Monday  in  March,  excepting  that 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  331 

the  term  of  the  first  board  shall  begin  from  the  time  they 
are  appointed  and  commissioned.  Each  member  of  said  board 
shall  take  the  following  oath  before  entering  upon  the  duties 
of  said  office: 

TERRITORY  OF  WASHINGTON,  1 

COUNTYOF J 

I, ,  do  solemnly  swear  that  I  will  support 

the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
and  the  laws  of  Washington  Territory  and  the  organic  Act 
thereof,  and  that  I  will  faithfully  perform  the  duties  of  the 
office  upon  which  I  am  about  to  enter.     So  help  me  God. 
[Signed]  

Sec.  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members 
President  and  one  the  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet  at 
least  once  in  each  year,  or  oftener,  at  the  call  of  any  three  mem- 
bers of  said  board.  Thirty  days' notice  must  be  given  of  the 
time  and  place  of  meeting  of  said  board,  said  notice  to  be 
mailed  to  all  practicing  dentists  in  the  Territory.  Three  mem- 
bers of  said  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  pro- 
ceedings thereof  shall,  at  all  reasonable  times,  be  open  to 
public  inspection. 

Sec.  4.  Within  three  months  from  the  time  this  Act 
takes  effect,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is,  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  this  Territory,  to  cause  his  or  her  name  and  resi- 
dence, or  place  of  business,  to  be  registered  with  said  Board 
of  Examiners,  who  shall  keep  a  book  for  that  purpose.  The 
statement  of  every  person  shall  be  verified  under  oath,  be- 
fore a  Notary  Public  or  Justice  of  the  Peace,  in  such  manner 
as  may  be  prescribed  by  the  Board  of  Examiners.  Every 
person,  who  shall  so  register  with  said  board  as  a  practitioner 
of  dentistry,  shall  receive  a  certificate  to  that  effect,  and  may 
continue  to  practice  as  such  without  incurring  any  of  the 
liabilities  or  penalties  provided  in  this  Act,  and  shall  pay  the 
Board  of  Examiners  for  such  certificate  a  fee  of  two  dollars 
and  fifty  cents. 


332  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  5.  Any  and  all  persons  who  shall  so  desire  may  ap- 
pear before  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings,  and  be 
examined  with  reference  to  their  knowledge  and  skill  in 
dental  surgery,  and  if  the  examination  of  any  such  person, 
or  persons,  shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board,  the  Board 
of  Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons  as  they  shall  find  to 
possess  the  requisite  qualifications  to  practice  dentistry  a  cer- 
tificate to  that  effect,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
this  Act.  Said  board  shall  also  indorse,  as  satisfactory,  diplo- 
mas from  any  reputable  dental  college,  when  satisfied  with 
the  character  of  such  institution,  upon  the  holder  furnishing 
evidence  satisfactory  to  the  board  of  his  or  her  right  to  the 
same,  and  shall  issue  a  certificate  to  that  effect  upon  the  pay- 
ment of  two  dollars  and  fifty  cents  to  said  board  for  said 
certificate.  All  certificates  issued  by  said  board  shall  be 
signed  by  its  officers  and  stamped  with  the  seal  of  said  board, 
and  such  certificates  shall  be  ^rma/acfe  evidence  of  the  right 
of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  Territory  of  Wash- 
ington. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  dentistry  contrary 
to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  in  any  sum 
not  less  than  fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars, 
or  be  confined  for  any  period  not  exceeding  six  months  in  the 
county  jail,  for  each  and  every  offense.  All  fines  recovered 
under  this  Act  shall  be  paid  into  the  common  school  fund  of 
the  county  in  which  the  conviction  is  had. 

Sec  7.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  maintaining  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  said  Board 
of  Examiners  shall  charge  each  person  applying  to  or  appear- 
ing before  them  for  examination  for  a  certificate  of  qualifi- 
cations a  fee  of  twenty-five  dollars,  which  fee  shall  in  no  case 
be  returned,  and  out  of  the  funds  coming  into  the  possession 
of  the  board  from  the  fees  so  charged,  the  sum  of  five  dollars 
for  each  day  actually  engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  ofhVe, 
and  all  legitimate  and  necessary  expenses  incurred  in  attend- 
ing the  meetings  of  said  board.  Said  expenses  shall  be  paid 
from  the  fees  and  penalties  received  by  the  board  under  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  333 

provisions  of  this  Act,  and  no  part  of  the  salary  or  expenses 
of  said  board  shall  be  ever  paid  out  of  the  Territorial  treas- 
ury. All  moneys  received  in  excess  of  salaries  and  expenses, 
as  above  provided  for,  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary  of  said 
board  as  a  special  fund  for  meeting  the  expenses  of  said  board 
and  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  he  giving  such 
bond  as  the  board  may,  from  time  to  time,  direct ;  and  said 
board  shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to  the 
Governor  on  or  before  the  15th  day  of  October  of  each  year, 
together  with  an  account  of  moneys  received  and  disbursed 
by  them  pursuant  to  this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  Any  person  who  shall  receive  a  certificate  from 
said  board  to  practice  dentistry,  shall  cause  his  or  her  cer- 
tificate to  be  registered  with  the  County  Auditor  of  the  county 
in  which  such  person  may  desire  to  engage  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry,  and  the  Recorder  of  Deeds  in  the  several  counties 
in  this  Territory  shall  be  entitled,  for  registering  such  cer- 
tificate, to  a  fee  of  one  dollar.  Any  failure,  neglect,  or  refusal 
on  the  part  of  any  person  holding  such  certificate  to  register 
the  same  with  the  Recorder  of  Deeds,  as  above  directed,  for 
a  period  of  six  months,  shall  work  a  forfeiture  of  the  certifi- 
cate ;  and  no  certificate,  when  once  forfeited,  shall  be  restored, 
except  upon  payment  to  said  Board  of  Examiners  the  sum  of 
twenty-five  dollars  as  a  penalty  for  such  neglect,  failure  or 
refusal. 

Sec.  9.  Any  person  who  shall  knowingly  and  falsely 
claim,  or  pretend  to  have,  or  to  hold,  a  certificate  of  license, 
d  iploma,  or  degree  granted  by  any  society,  or  who  shall  falsely, 
or  with  intent  to  deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pretend  to  be  a 
graduate  from  any  incorporated  dental  college, shall  be  deemed 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  liable  to  the  same 
penalties  as  provided  in  section  6  of  this  Act. 

Sec  10.  Any  two  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners 
shall  issue  a  temporary  certificate  to  any  applicant  upon  the 
presentation  by  such  applicant  of  the  evidence  of  the  neces- 
sary qualifications  to  practice  dentistry.  Such  temporary 
certificate  shall  remain  in  force  until  the  regular  meeting  of 
said  board  occurring  next  after  the  date  of  such  temporary 


334  APPENDIX. 

certificate,  and  no  longer;  but  such  temporary  certificate 
shall  not  be  granted  by  any  two  members  of  said  board  after 
said  board  lias  rejected  the  applicant.  All  members  of  said 
Board  of  Examiners  shall,  at  the  regular  meeting  of  said 
board,  make  a  report  of  such  temporary  certificate  issued 
by  them. 

Sec.  11.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  passage  by  said  board. 
Approved  January  28th,  1888. 


WEST  VIRGINIA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  this  State,  and  to 
Protect  the  People  against  Empiricism  in  Relation  thereto. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  West  Vir- 
ginia, It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry,  for  compensation,  in  this  State,  unless 
such  person  shall  have  received  a  diploma  from  some  dental 
college,  duly  incorporated  under  the  laws  of  this  State,  or 
some  of  the  United  States,  or  foreign  government,  in  which 
is  annually  delivered,  in  good  faith,  a  full  course  of  lectures 
and  instructions  in  dentistry ;  or  shall  have  obtained  a  license 
from  a  Board  of  Dentists,  duly  authorized  and  appointed  by 
the  authorities  of  this  State,  or  some  one  of  the  United 
States,  in  the  manner  hereinafter  mentioned. 

Sec  2.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Public 
"Works  to  appoint  nine  dentists,  learned  in  the  profession, 
three  of  whom  shall  be  appointed  in  each  Congressional  Dis- 
trict, wTho  shall  constitute  a  board  for  the  examination  of 
applicants  in  their  own  district,  and  before  which  all  appli- 
cants for  license  to  practice  dentistry  shall  appear  and  be  ex- 
amined touching  his  proficiency  in  said  art,  or  profession, 
and  if  two,  or  more,  of  said  board  deem  the  said  applicant 
qualified  to  practice   said  profession,  they  shall   sign   said 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  335 

license.  For  making  which  examination  the  said  examiners 
shall  have  a  fee  of  two  dollars  each,  to  be  paid  by  the  appli- 
cant ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  prevent  any 
person  from  extracting  teeth,  or  in  any  manner  interfere  with 
any  person  now  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this 
State.     The  term  of  office  of  such  board  shall  be  five  years. 

Sec.  3.  Any  person  violating  the  provisions  of  this  Act 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  on  conviction 
thereof,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  ten  nor  more  more  than 
one  hundred  dollars. 

Approved  February  21st,  1881. 

An  Act  to  amend  and  re-enact  Section  two,  of  Chapter  XL  V,  of 
the  Acts  of  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-one,  Con- 
cerning Dentistry. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  West  Vir- 
ginia, That  section  2,  of  chapter  XLV,  of  the  Acts  of  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-one,  be  amended  and  re- 
enacted  so  as  to  read  as  follows : 

Sec  2.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Public 
"Works  to  appoint  twelve  dentists,  learned  in  the  profession, 
three  of  whom  shall  be  appointed  in  each  Congressional  Dis- 
trict, who  shall  constitute  a  board  for  the  examination  of 
applicants  in  their  own  district,  and  before  which  any  appli- 
cant for  license  to  practice  dentistry  shall  appear  and  be  ex- 
amined touching  his  proficiency  in  such  art,  or  profession,  and 
if  two  or  more  of  said  board  shall  deem  the  said  applicant 
qualified  to  practice  said  profession,  they  shall  sign  said 
license.  For  making  which  examination  the  said  Examin- 
ers shall  have  a  fee  of  two  dollars  each,  to  be  paid  by  the  ap- 
plicant ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  prevent 
any  person  from  extracting  teeth,  with  or  without  compen- 
sation, or  in  any  manner  interfere  with  any  person  who  was 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State  on  the  four- 
teenth day  of  May,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty- 
one.     The  term  of  office  of  such  board  shall  be  five  years. 

Approved  February  22nd,  1883. 


836  APPENDIX. 

WISCONSIN. 

An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry,  and  to  Establish 
a  Board  of  Dental  Examiners. 

Section  1.  The  jyeople  of  the  State  of  Wisconsin,  repre- 
sented in  Senate  and  Assembly,  do  enact  as  follows:  It  shall  be 
unlawful  for  any  person  who  is  not,  at  the  time  of  the  pas- 
sage of  this  Act,  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this 
State,  to  commence  such  practice,  unless  he  shall  have  ob- 
tained a  license  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Sec  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  prac- 
ticing dentists,  is  hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to 
carry  out  the  purposes  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 
The  members  of  said  board  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor. Three  members  of  this  board,  at  least,  shall  be  members 
of  the  Wisconsin  State  Dental  Society.  The  terms  for  which 
the  members  of  said  board  shall  hold  their  offices  shall  be 
five  years,  except  that  the  members  of  the  board  first  to  be 
appointed  under  this  Act,  shall  hold  their  offices  for  the 
terms  of  one,  two,  three,  four  and  five  years,  respectively, 
and  until  their  successors  are  appointed  and  qualified.  In 
case  of  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such  vacancy  shall 
be  filled  by  the  Governor. 

Sec.  3.  Said  board  shall  choose  one  of  its  members  Presi- 
dent and  one  Secretary  thereof,  and  it  shall  meet  at  least 
once  in  each  year,  and  as  much  oftener  and  at  such  times 
and  places  as  it  may  deem  necessary.  A  majority  of  said 
board  shall  at  all  meetings  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  pro- 
ceedings thereof  shall,  at  all  reasonable  times,  be  open  to 
public  inspection. 

Sec  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  is  en- 
gaged in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  within  six 
months  from  the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  annu- 
ally thereafter,  to  cause  his  or  her  name  and  residence,  or 
place  of  business,  to  be  registered  with  said  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers, who  shall  keep  a  book  for  that  purpose  ;  and  every 
person  who  shall  register  with  said  board  as   a  practitioner 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  337 

of  dentistry,  may  continue  to  practice  the  same  as  such  with- 
out incurring  any  of  the  liabilities  or  penalties  provided  in 
this  Act.  The  Board  of  Examiners  shall  furnish  to  the 
•County  Clerks  a  certified  list  of  those  registered,  and  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  County  Clerks  to  register  such  names  in  a 
book  kept  for  such  purpose.  Every  person  registering  with 
the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  pay,  as  a  fee  therefor,  the  sum 
of  one  dollar. 

Sec.  5.  Any  and  all  persons,  who  shall  so  desire,  may 
appear  before  the  said  board  at  any  of  its  regular  meetings, 
and  be  examined  with  reference  to  the  knowledge  and  skill 
in  dental  surgery,  and  if  the  examination  of  any  such  per- 
-son  or  persons  shall  prove  satisfactory  to  said  board,  the 
Board  of  Examiners  shall  issue  to  such  persons,  as  they  shall 
find  from  such  examination  to  possess  the  requisite  qualifica^ 
t ions,  a  license  to  practice  dentistry,  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  this  Act.  But  said  board  shall  at  all  times  is- 
sue a  license  to  any  regular  graduate  of  any  reputable,  legally 
incorporated  dental  college,  which  requires  that  the  candidate 
for  graduation  shall  attend  two  full  courses  of  lectures,  of  five 
months  each,  the  last  of  which  shall  be  attended  in  the  insti- 
tution granting  the  diploma,  without  examination,  upon  the 
payment  by  such  graduate  to  the  said  board  of  a  fee  of  one 
dollar.  All  licenses  issued  by  said  board  shall  be  signed  by 
the  members  thereof,  and  be  attested  by  its  President  and 
•Secretary  ;  and  such  license  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of 
the  rights  of  the  holder  to  practice  dentistry  in  the  State  of 
Wisconsin. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act  shall  be  liable  to  prosecution  before  any 
court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  upon  information,  or  by 
indictment,  and,  upon  conviction,  may  be  fined  not  less  than 
fifty  dollars,  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  for  each 
and  every  offense. 

Sec.  7.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  maintaining  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  said  Board 
of  Examiners  may  charge  each  person  applying  to  or  appear- 
ing before  them  for  examination  for  license  to  practice  den- 


IPPENDIX. 


tistry  a  fee  of  ten  dollars.  And  out  of  the  funds  coming 
into  their  possession,  from  the  fees  mentioned  in  this  Act, 
the  members  of  said  board  may  receive  all  legitimate  and 
necessary  expenses  incurred  in  attending  the  meetings  of  said 
board  and  in  conducting  the  business  thereof.  Said  expenses 
shall  be  paid  from  the  fees  received  by  the  board,  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  and  no  part  of  the  expenses  of  said 
board  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  State  treasury.  All  moneys 
received  in  excess  of  said  expenses,  above  provided  for,  shall 
be  held  by  the  Secretary  of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for 
meeting  the  expenses  of  said  board,  he  giving  such  bond  as 
the  board  shall,  from  time  to  time,  direct.  And  said  board 
shall  make  an  annual  report  of  its  proceedings  to  the  Gov- 
ernor, on  the  thirtieth  day  of  September  in  each  year,  to- 
gether with  an  account  of  all  moneys  received  and  disbursed 
by  them  pursuant  to  this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  This  Act  shall  take  effect,  and  be  in  force,  from 
and  after  its  passage  and  publication. 

Approved  March  23d,  1885. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  339 

DENTAL  LAWS 

IN 

FOREIGN    COUNTRIES. 


AUSTRIA-HUNGARY. 

There  is  no  special  enactment  regulating  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  Austria-Hungary  further  than  the  requirements 
that  every  dentist  who  seeks  to  practice  the  profession  in 
that  country,  must  be  an  Austrian-Hungary  citizen,  and  a 
graduated  physician  or  doctor  possessing  a  diploma  from  a 
recognized  college  ;  or,  who  has  complied  with  the  legal  re- 
quirements, after  which  he  can  practice  any  medical  specialty 
he  may  select:  either,  surgeon,  oculist,  dentist,  etc.  There 
are  no  special  universities  for  dentists  only. 

Besides  the  dental  specialists,  there  are  established  me- 
chanical dentists  who,  while  not  recognized  by  the  govern- 
ment, are  suffered  to  perform  the  mechanical  operations  in 
the  laboratory,  such  as  the  making  of  artificial  denturesr 
etc.,  but  legally  they  have  no  right  to  perform  dental  opera- 
tions in  the  mouth  of  a  patient. 


BELGIUM. 


According  to  the  statutes  of  Belgium,  no  person,  other 
than  a  registered  medical  practitioner,  is  entitled  to  take,  or 
use,  the  name  or  title  of  dentist,  either  alone  or  in  combina- 
tion with  other  words,  or  of  dental  practitioner,  or  in  any 
wise  practice  the  profession  of  dentistry,  unless  he  or  she 
shall  have  passed  the  examinations  of  the  Board  of  Dental 
Examiners  in  the  county  in  which  he  or  she  will  practice 
the  profession  of  dentistry. 

The  Board  of  Examiners  is  usually  composed  of  medical 
practitioners. 


340  APPENDIX. 

The  examinations  are  theoretical,  including  such  subjects 
as  anatomy,  physiology,  histology,  etc.  The  examinations  in, 
these  branches  are  conducted  in  a  thorough  manner,  whereas 
the  practical  examinations  in  operative  and  prosthetic  den- 
tist ly  are  lax.  Belgium  is  divided  into  nine  counties.  Each 
county  has  its  Special  Board  of  Dental  Examiners.  Dentists 
desiring  to  practice  in  a  neighboring  county  must  again  pass 
an  examination  before  the  County  Board  of  Examiners. 


BRAZIL. 

The  candidate  for  admission  to  practice  dentistry  in 
Brazil  must  present  a  reputable  diploma  from  a  recognized 
foreign  dental  college.  He  is  then  required  to  pass  an  ex- 
amination before  the  Medical  Faculty  at  the  college  either 
at  Rio  de  Janeiro  or  Bahia.  The  candidate  must  pass  two 
series  of  examinations,  viz.:  First,  anatoni}-,  physiology,  his- 
tology, etc. ;  secondly,  hygiene,  therapeutics,  operative  and 
prosthetic  dentistry. 

The  examinations  are :  written,  practical  demonstrations, 
and  oral.  The  latter  are  the  final  examinations,  and  are 
conducted  by  three  professors  of  the  Faculty  of  Medicine 
in  the  French  or  Portuguese  language. 

The  examinations  can  be  obtained  within  one  month 
from  the  time  of  application.  After  satisfactorily  passing 
the  examinations  of  the  Medical  Faculty,  the  diploma  held 
by  the  candidate  must  first  be  recorded  by  the  Board  of 
Hygiene,  before  he  can  commence  the  practice  of  dentistry 
in  Brazil. 

If  the  candidate  does  dot  possess  a  recognized  dental 
diploma,  he  must  take  three  courses  in  the  dental  department 
of  the  Medical  College.  Before  matriculating,  he  must  pre- 
sent a  certificate  showing  that  he  has  taken  a  collegiate  course, 
or  has  passed  a  satisfactory  examination  in  such  branches  as 
algebra,  geography,  French,  etc. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  341 

CUBA. 

The  laws  and  plans  of  the  studies  which  a  student  is 
subjected  to  before  he  can  practice  dentistry  in  Cuba  are  as 
follows:  The  student  is  required  to  undergo  three  years  of 
study  and  practice  to  complete  his  course.  There  is  no  den- 
tal department  connected  with  the  university,  hence  the 
studies  pertaining  to  the  dental  course  are  conducted  in 
academies  specially  authorized  for  this  purpose  by  the  Gen- 
eral Government  and  the  Royal  University. 

The  candidate  must  inscribe  his  name  in  the  university 
each  year  after  having  passed  successfully  the  preliminary 
studies,  that  he  be  allowed  to  enter  the  above  mentioned 
academies. 

After  three  years  of  study  and  practice  acquired  during 
that  time,  either  at  the  academy,  in  hospitals,  State  prisons, 
public  establishments,  or  in  the  office  of  a  practicing  dentist,  the 
candidate  must  submit  to  a  final  examination  for  his  degree. 
This  examination  is  held  in  the  Royal  University,  at  Havana, 
Cuba,  and  under  the  supervision  of  three  doctors,  professors 
of  the  university,  and  two  dentists.  The  examinations  in 
anatomy,  physiology,  pathology,  therapeutics  and  materia 
medica  are  conducted  by  the  Doctors  in  Medicine  ;  whereas 
the  examination  in  operative  and  mechanical  dentistry  and 
metallurgy  are  in  charge  of  the  dentists.  Before  passing 
this  theoretical  examination,  the  candidate  must  undergo  the 
examinations  in  operative  and  prosthetic  dentistry.  The 
student  is  required  to  perform  some  dental  operation,  gen- 
erally the  extraction  of  a  tooth,  because  of  its  brevity.  This 
operation  is  performed  in  the  aforesaid  public  establishments, 
and  under  the  observance  of  the  above  mentioned  tribunal, 
who  inspect  the  operation.  The  prosthetic  examination  then 
follows.  The  student  is  required  to  make  an  artificial  den- 
ture, or  some  similar  mechanical  operation.  This  denture, 
together  with  the  patient  for  whom  it  is  destined,  are  pre- 
sented at  the  university.  lie  must  present  a  certificate  from 
some  academy  or  practicing  dentist,  at  "whose  office  he  has 
performed  the  work,  certifying  that  the  denture  was  made 
by  himself. 


342  APPENDIX. 

He  must  then  pass  the  theoretical  examination,  consist- 
ing as  above  mentioned  of  the  following  studies:  Anatomy, 
physiology,  pathology,  therapeutics,  materia  medica,  pro- 
tesis  and  metallurgy.  The  examination  on  each  branch  lasts 
ten  minutes.  When  these  are  finished  the  aforesaid  tribunal 
decides  whether  the  candidate  be  passed  or  rejected.  The 
expenses  of  the  course  are  as  follows:  To  the  academies  must 
be  paid  the  amount  of  $8.50  to  $17  in  Spanish  gold,  monthly ; 
the  official  examination  costs  $25.75  in  Spanish  gold.  This 
amount  is  required  for  acquiring  the  right  to  be  examined. 
The  final  examination  for  the  degree  incurs  an  expense  of 
$120,  Spanish  gold.  If  these  requirements  are  not  complied 
with,  the  degree  is  void,  and  the  profession  cannot  legally  be 
practiced. 

A  practicing  dentist  is  required  to  pay  the  Government 
a  tax  of  $60,  Spanish  gold,  annually.  However,  the  dentists 
of  Cuba  have  formed  an  association,  and  thus  the  tax  is  re- 
duced, pro  rata,  varying  from  $30  to  $100,  Spanish  gold, 
annually. 


DENMARK  AND  DANISH  PROVINCES. 

Any  person  desirous  of  practicing  dentistry  in  Denmark 
or  its  Provinces,  must  first  pass  a  preparatory  examination  in 
Danish  history,  geography,  geometry,  algebra,  English  or 
French,  and  two  exercises. 

The  regular  dental  examination  is  conducted  by  mem- 
bers of  the  Medical  Faculty  and  several  dentists  appointed 
by  the  Board  of  Health.  These  examinations  are  held  semi- 
annually, in  May  and  December.  In  the  technical  or  practi- 
cal trial,  the  candidate  must  give  proof  of  his  dexterity  in 
the  setting  and  insertion  of  a  single  artificial  tooth  and  six 
partial  or  full  dentures. 

In  operative  dentistry,  he  must  also,  by  practical  demon- 
stration, prove  his  ability  to  creditably  perform  the  various 
operations  in  the  mouth. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  343 

He  must  procure  the  patients  and  the  necessary  materials 
himself;  whereas  tools  and  the  use  of  the  laboratory,  forcer- 
tain  hours  daily,  will  be  designated  by  the  dentists  of  the 
Board  of  Examination,  who  will  have  special  control  over 
the  practical  trial.  The  work  must  be  finished  within  four- 
teen days,  and  be  judged  by  the  whole  board. 

The  dentist  appointed  as  special  supervisor  of  this  trial, 
receives  20  R.* 

The  theoretical  trial  is  conducted  by  the  whole  board, 
and  the  examinations  are  verbal,  consisting  of  the  subjects  as 
follows : 

a.  Anatomy  and  physiology  of  the  face,  teeth,  gums, 
and  the  whole  mouth.  • 

b.  Pathology  of  the  mouth,  more  especially  of  the  teeth, 
gums  and  jaw-bones ;  also  of  the  diseases  of  the  teeth  and 
gums. 

c.  The  preparation  and  effects  of  the  medicines,  gener- 
ally used  in  dentistry. 

d.  A  knowledge  of  dental  instruments  and  their  appli- 
cation. Indications  for  the  different  operations,  and  their 
practical  execution.  In  each  of  the  verbal  branches,  the  ex- 
amination lasts  for  half  an  hour ;  that  on  the  operations  and 
instruments,  not  more  than  one  hour. 

20  R.  entrance-fee  is  charged  for  examination. 

The  candidate  may  be  re-examined  within  five  months 
if  he  fails  to  pass  in  the  first  trial ;  but  he  need  not  again  be 
examined  in  the  technical  branch,  if  its  results  have  pre- 
viously been  satisfactory.  No  dentist  is  allowed  to  admin- 
ister an  anaesthetic  without  the  presence  of  a  medical  practi- 
tioner, who  is  entitled  to  a  fee  for  his  services  from  the  dentist 
who  employs  him. 

*  1  Riss  is  about  T5s°<j  cents. 


:>44  APPENDIX. 

FRANCE. 

In  France,no  person  is  allowed  to  practice  the  profession 
of  dentistry,  unless  he  or  she  possess  a  recognized  dental  or 
medical  diploma. 

It  is  stipulated  that  none  but  a  doctor  of  medicine, 
officer  of  health,  or  one  who  has  passed  an  examination  for 
the  title  of  dental  surgery,  have  such  rights. 

The  dentist  is  forbidden  to  use  anaesthetics,  either  gen- 
eral or  local  (cocaine,  nitrous  oxide  or  ether  spray),  without 
the  assistance  of  a  recognized  physician  or  surgeon. 

Below  is  given  the  text  in  extenso  of  the  projected  law 
concerning  the  practice  of  medicine,  which  has  been  agreed 
upon  by  the  committee  of  the  Senate.  This  text  is  complete, 
definite,  and  will  not  be  modified  until  the  public  discussion. 
It  has  already  been  communicated  to  the  deputies  who  form 
part  of  the  committee  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  and  to  the 
Government  Commissioner,  M.  Brouardel,andithasbeen  the 
subject  of  various  discussions  between  the  committee  of  the 
Senate,  the  representatives  of  the  Chamber  and  the  Minis- 
try, and  as  a  result  a  series  of  modifications  have  been  added. 

[Note. — There  have  been  many  inquiries  as  to  what  time 
the  discussion  of  this  project  before  the  Senate  wTill  take 
place.  It  is  impossible  that  it  shall  be  discussed  in  189 1, 
because  the  moment  the  discussion  on  the  custom  duties  will 
have  closed,  the  Senate  will  take  up  the  financial  laws,  which 
will  occupy  the  attention  of  the  High  Assembly  till  January 
1st,  provided  it  can  finish  their  examination  by  that  time. 
"We  are  informed  that  M.  Cornil  will  introduce  his  report  at 
the  end  of  this  month  or  in  the  beginning  of  January.  The 
discussion  will  then  seriously  come  before  the  Senate  during 
the  month  of  January.  After  the  vote  of  the  Senate,  the 
law  will  return  to  the  Chamber.  Placing  things  at  their 
best,  if  it  passes  the  Chamber,  as  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  it 
will,  after  the  agreement  between  the  delegates  of  the  Cham- 
ber and  the  Senate,  the  law  can  be  promulgated  in  March  or 
April.  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that,  according  to  article 
36,  it  will  be  applicable  only  one  year  after  its  promulgation. 
The  regulations,  consultations  of  the  Committee  on  Hygiene,, 
the  Academy  of  Medicine  and  the  Superior  Council  of  Pub- 
lic Instruction,  decreed  by  diverse  articles  of  this  project, 
wTill  necessitate  that  delay,  at  least.    Therefore,  it  will  not  be 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  345 

executed  before  the  month  of  April,  1893,  at  the  earliest. 
— Revue  Odontoloyique.] 

[Extracts  from  the  text  of  the  project  of  the  law  on  the 
practice  of*  medicine,  proprosed  by  the  committee  of  the 
Senate.     Published  by  the  Semaine  Medicate.'] 

CHAPTER  II. 

Conditions  for  the  Practice  of  the  Profession  of  Dentistry. 

Art.  2.  The  practice  of  dentistry  is  prohibited  to  any 
person  who  does  not  possess  a  diploma  of  a  doctor  of  medi- 
cine, or  that  of  an  officer  of  health,  or  a  dentist.  The 
diploma  of  dentist  will  be  issued  by  the  French  government 
after  an  examination  passed  at  an  establishment  of  superior 
medical  instruction  of  the  state,  and  following  a  course  of 
studies  decided  upon  by  the  Superior  Council  of  Public  In- 
struction. 

Those  dentists  who  are  not  provided  with  this  special  diploma 
cannot  practice  general  anaesthetics  without  the  assistance  of  a 
doctor  of  medicine,  or  an  officer  of  health. 

CHAPTER   III. 

Practice  of  Medicine,  Dentistry  and  Midwifery. 

Art.  5.  From  the  time  prescribed  by  the  article  37  for 
the  application  of  the  law,  doctors,  dentists  and  midwives 
coming  from  foreign  countries,  whatever  their  nationality, 
can  only  practice  their  professions  in  France  on  condition 
of  having  obtained  a  diploma  of  a  doctor  of  medicine,  or 
midwifery,  or  dentist,  with  the  stipulations  contained  in 
articles  1,  2  and  3. 

Dispensations  can  be  granted  by  a  Minister,  conform- 
able to  the  regulation  of  the  Superior  Council  of  Public 
Instruction. 

Art.  9.  Doctors  of  medicine,  officers  of  health,  dentists 
and  midwives  are  obliged,  after  one  month's  sojourn  in  the 
place  selected  for  their  residence,  to  register  their  title,  free 
of  charge,  in  the  prefecture  or  sub-prefecture,  and  also  at  the 
registry  of  the  civil  court  of  their  district. 


346  APPENDIX. 

The  change  of  residence  to  another  one  necessitates  a  new 
registry  of  title  within  the  same  space  of  time. 

Those  who  have  never  practiced  or  have  ceased  to  prac- 
tice since  two  years,  and  desire  to  devote  themselves  to  the 
practice  of  their  profession,  must  equally  register  their  title, 
and  in  the  same  manner. 

Art.  10.  Each  year  separate  lists  are  prepared  by  the 
prefects  and  the  judicial  authorities,  bearing  the  names  and 
surnames,  residences,  dates  and  places  of  reception  of  doctors, 
dentists  and  midwives,  provided  by  articles  1  and  2. 

These  lists  are  exposed  every  year,  about  the  first  half 
of  January,  in  all  the  public  buildings  of  the  district.  Cer- 
tified copies  of  same  are  transmitted  to  the  Ministers  of  In- 
terior, Public  Instruction  and  Justice. 

The  statistics  of  the  medical  stafF  in  France  and  the 
colonies  are  prepared  each  year  under  the  care  of  the  Minis- 
ter of  Interior. 

Art.  11.  The  simultaneous  practice  of  the  professions  of 
medicine,  dentistry  or  midwifery  with  that  of  a  pharmacist 
or  herbalist,  is  prohibited,  even  in  case  the  person  possesses 
the  necessary  titles  for  the  practice  of  those  professions. 
This  rule  has  no  retroactive  effect.* 

CHAPTER   VI. 

Transitory  Provisions. 

Art.  30.  Foreign  doctors  and  midwives  who  have  been 
authorized  to  practice  their  profession  before  the  promulga- 
tion of  the  present  law,  will  continue  to  enjoy  this  privilege 
under  the  conditions  as  it  has  been  given  them. 

Art.  31.  Officers  of  health  accepted  prior  to  the  present 
law,  and  those  accepted  under  the  conditions  determined  by 

*  At  the  meeting  of  the  Senate,  March  18th,  1892,  all  the  articles  of  the 
law  were  passed,  with  the  exception  of  the  second  paragraph  of  Article  2, 
which  is  printed  above  in  Italics,  and  which  has  been  returned  to  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies  for  revision,  after  a  spirited  discussion,  which  lasted  two  days. 

The  general  opinion  seems  to  be  opposed  to  the  restrictions  of  the  right 
of  a  qualified  dentist  to  administer  anaesthetics. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  347 

article  33  below,  have  the  right  to  practice  medicine  in  all 
parts  of  the  Republic. 

Art.  32.  A  dispensation  from  the  Superior  Council  of 
Public  Instruction  will  determine  these  conditions,  when  «, 
an  officer  of  health  can  obtain  the  degree  of  doctor  of  medi- 
cine ;  and  b,  a  dentist  who  complies  with  the  transitory  dis- 
pensations can  obtain  a  diploma  of  dentist. 

Art.  33.  Scholars  who,  at  the  time  of  the  promulgation 
of  the  present  law,  will  have  just  entered  upon  the  studies" 
for  the  position  of  an  officer  of  health,  can  continue  their 
medical  studies,  according  to  the  rules  previously  in  force, 
and  obtain  the  diploma  of  an  officer  of  health. 

Art.  34.  The  right  to  practice  dentistry,  by  the  transitory 
dispensation,  is  granted  to  every  dentist  upon  the  production 
of  proof  that  he  has  been  practicing  for  two  years  up  to  the 
day  of  the  promulgation  of  the  present  law.  This  privilege, 
however,  does  not  give  the  right  to  a  dentist,  in  the  circum- 
stances indicated  in  the  preceding  paragraph,  to  practice 
anaesthetics  in  any  case. 

Art.  35.  The  right  to  continue  the  practice  of  their  pro- 
fession is  maintained  for  midwives  of  the  first  and  second 
classes,  accepted  by  virtue  of  articles  30,  31  and  32  of  the 
law  of  the  19  ventose,  xi,  or  by  succeeding  ministerial  decrees. 

Art.  36.  The  present  law  is  ■  applicable  after  one  year 
from  its  promulgation. 

Art.  37.  The  present  law  is  applicable  in  Algiers  and 
the  colonies,  without  prejudice  to  the  special  provisions  by 
laws,  decrees  and  regulations  concerning  the  practice  of  medi- 
cine in  their  respective  territories. 


348  APPENDIX. 

GERMANY. 

Laws  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  and  the  Examination 
of  Dentists  in  the  German  Umpire. 

Section  1.  The  following  are  authorized  to  confer  the 
degree  of  dentist  for  the  Empire  : 

1.  The  central  authorities  of  those  federal  states  which 
have  one  or  more  state  universities,  and  the  respective  Minis- 
tries for  the  empires  of  Prussia,  Bavaria,  Saxony  and  Wiirtem- 
berg ;  the  grand  dukedoms  of  Baden,  Hessen  and  Mecklenburg- 
Schwerin ;  and  in  common  with  the  Ministries  of  the  grand 
dukedom  and  dukedoms  of  Saxony. 

2.  The  Ministry  for  Elsas-Lorraine. 

Sec  2.  The  degree  is  conferred  on  those  who  have  passed 
satisfactorily  the  dental  examination,  according  to  the  regu- 
lations mentioned  below. 

Sec.  3.  The  examination .  of  dentists  takes  place  before 
one  of  the  committees  formed  for  the  examination  of  phy- 
sicians, to  which  committee  at  least  one  practical  dentist  is 
added  for  that  purpose.  The  chairman  conducts  the  exami- 
nations, is  entitled  to  be  present  at  all  of  them,  takes  care 
that  all  the  rules  concerning  the  order  of  examinations  are 
strictly  observed,  fills  the  vacancy  in  case  of  a  member  being 
absent,  reports  immediately  after  the  close  of  each  examina- 
tion period  to  the  proper  authority  about  the  actions  of  the 
committee,  and  gives  account  of  the  fees.  Each  year  there 
are  two  examinations,  one  in  the  summer  and  the  other  in 
the  winter  semester.  The  applications  for  examination  are 
to  be  made  to  the  proper  authorities  before  the  1st  of  April 
and  the  1st  of  November,  respectively.  Delayed  applications 
will  only  be  considered  for  exceptional  causes. 

Sec  4.  To  be  admitted  to  examination,  the  following 
conditions  must  be  fulfilled  by  the  applicants : 

1.  He  must  be  a  graduate  of  a  German  gymnasium,  or 
real  school,  or  have  passed  a  similar  examination  before  an 
Examining  Board  attached  to  the  above  educational  institu- 
tions ; 

"2.   Must  have  served  at  least  one  year's  apprenticeship 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  349 

at  some  higher  dental  institution  or  with  some  qualified 
dentist; 

3.  Followed  a  course  of  dental  studies  for  at  least  four 
semesters  at  the  universities  of  the  German  Empire. 

To  the  application  for  examination  must  be  added  the 
proofs,  in  original,  of  the  fulfillment  of  the  above  conditions, 
and  also  a  short  autobiography. 

Sec.  5.  The  examination  consists  of  four  divisions : 

I.  In  the  first  division,  the  candidate  is  given,  by  the  chi- 
rurgical  member  of  the  Examining  Board,  to  examine  a  case 
where  the  teeth  and  gums  are  affected,  to  establish  the  diag- 
nosis and  prognosis,  as  well  as  the  remedy  in  the  case,  the  re- 
sult to  be  entered  at  once  in  a  protocol  countersigned  by  the 
examiner;  which,  together  with  a  critical  report  on  the  sick 
case,  made  and  signed  the  same  day,  is  to  be  delivered  on  the 
next  morning  to  the  examiner. 

II.  The  second  division  has  three  parts : 

1.  Anatomy  and  physiology  ; 

2.  General  pathology,  therapeutics  and  the  healing  art, 
including  toxicology ; 

3.  Local  surgical-dental  pathology  and  therapeutics. 

In  each  part,  the  candidate  must  answer,  privately,  in 
writing,  two  questions  under  the  special  supervision  of  a 
member  of  the  Examining  Board,  without  the  use  of  any 
expedients.     The  questions  are  determined  by  lot. 

III.  In  the  third  division,  which  consists  of  two  parts, 
the  candidate  has  to  prove,  in  the  presence  of  the  examiner: 

1.  His  practical  knowledge  of  the  application  of  different 
dental  instruments,  as  well  as  in  the  performance  of  a  den- 
tal operation  on  a  living  subject,  and  besides  make  at  least 
two  fillings — one  of  them  in  gold — two  extractions,  and  one 
cleaning  of  the  teeth  ; 

2.  His  practical  knowledge  of  "  substitutes  "  and  regula- 
tion apparatus,  and  also  prepare  at  least  one  "  substitute  "  piece 
and  an  apparatus  for  the  mouth  of  a  living  person. 

IV.  In  the  fourth  division,  the  candidate  is  examined, 


350  APPENDIX. 

orally,  in  anatomy,  physiology,  pathology  and  diathesis  of 
the  teeth,  the  diseases  of  same  and  of  the  gums,  the  prepara- 
tion and  action  of  dental  medicines,  and  the  application  of  the 
different  dental  operations.  The  examination  in  this  division 
is  public. 

Sec.  12.  Qualified  physicians  who  desire  to  receive  the 
degree  of  dentist  are  only  required  to  pass  an  examination  in 
the  first,  third  and  fourth  divisions,  the  others  being  dis- 
pensed with. 

Sec.  13.  The  fees  for  the  whole  examination  are  seventy 
Marks,  the  charges  being  made  for  every  department  sepa- 
rately. If  any  person  withdraws  from  examination  in  some 
parts,  or  is  not  admitted  to  the  same,  the  money  paid  is  re- 
funded. 

Sec.  15.  The  Chancellor  of  the  Empire,  in  consultation 
with  the  proper  central  authorities,  decides  cases  where  special 
dispensations  are  to  be  granted. 

The  above  rules  take  effect  on  November  1st,  1889. 

Any  person  who,  without  being  qualified  for  it,  assumes 
the  title  of  doctor  or  dentist,  or  adds  any  similar  title  by 
which  the  belief  is  created  that  the  possessor  thereof  is  a 
qualified  medical  person,  shall  be  fined  three  hundred  Marks, 
or,  in  default,  shall  be  imprisoned  for  a  length  of  time  stipu- 
lated in  these  statutes.  (Statutes  regulating  the  professions 
in  the  German  Empire,  1886.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  351 

GREAT  BRITAIN. 

ENGLAND  AND  THE  BRITISH  POSSESSIONS. 

The  Dentists'  Act,  1878,  U  and  1$  Vict,  Cap.  XXXIII. 

An  Act  to  amend  the  Laic  relating  to  Dental  Practitioners, 
{July  22nd,  1878.) 

Whereas,  it  is  expedient  that  provision  be  made  for  the 
registration  of  persons  specially  qualified  to  practice  as 
dentists  in  the  United  Kingdom,  and  that  the  law  relating 
to  persons  practicing  as  dentists  be  otherwise  amended  ; 

Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  Queen's  most  Excellent  Majesty, 
by  and  with  advice  and  consent  of  the  Lord's  Spiritual  and, 
Temporal,  and  Commons,  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  This  Act  may  for  all  purposes  be  cited  as  the 
Dentists'  Act,  1878. 

Sec  2.  In  this  Act, "  General  Council "  means  the  General 
Council  of  Medical  Education  and  Registration  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  established  under  the  Medical  Act  of  1858,  and 
"  Branch  Council  "  means  a  branch  of  the  said  Council  as 
constituted  by  the  same  Act : 

"  General  Registrar  "  means  the  person  appointed  to  be 
the  Registrar  by  the  General  Council,  and  "  Local  Registrar  " 
means  the  Registrar  appointed  by  a  Branch  Council  under 
the  Medical  Act,  1858  : 

"  British  Possession  "  means  any  part  of  Her  Majesty's 
dominions  exclusive  of  the  United  Kingdom : 

"  Medical  Authorities  "  means  the  bodies  and  univer- 
sities who  choose  members  of  the  General  Council. 

REGISTRATION. 

Sec.  3.  From  and  after  the  first  day  of  August,  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  a  person  shall  not  be  en- 
titled to  take  or  use  the  name  or  title  of  "  dentist "  (either 
alone  or  in  combination  with  any  other  word  or  words),  or  of 


352  APPENDIX. 

"dental  practitioner,"  or  any  name,  title,  addition,  or  descrip- 
tion, implying  thatlie  is  registered  under  this  Act,  or  that  he  is 
a  person  specially  qualified  to  practice  dentistry,  unless  he  is 
registered  under  this  Act.  It  is  hereby  declared  that  the  words 
"  title,  addition,  or  description"  where  used  in  the  Dentists'  Act, 
1878,  include  any  title,  addition  to  a  name,  designation  or  descrip- 
tion, whether  expressed  in  icords  or  hy  letters,  or  partly  in  one  way 
and  partly  in  the  other:1' 

Any  person  who,  after  the  first  day  of  August,  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  not  being  registered 
under  this  Act,  takes  or  uses  any  such  name,  title,  addition, 
or  description  as  aforesaid,  shall  be  liable,  on  summary  con- 
viction, to  a  fine  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds,  provided  that 
nothing  in  this  section  shall  apply  to  legally  qualified  med- 
ical practitioners. 

Sec.  4.  With  respect  to  the  offense  of  a  person  not  regis- 
tered under  this  Act,  taking  or  using  any  name,  title,  addition, 
or  description  as  above  in  this  Act  mentioned,  the  following 
provisions  shall  have  effect : 

1.  He  shall  not  be  guilty  of  an  offense  under  this  Act — 
(a.)  If  he  shows  that  he  is  not  ordinarily  a  resident  in 

the  United  Kingdom,  and  that  he  holds  a  qualification  which 
entitles  him  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  a 
British  possession  or  foreign  country,  and  that  he  did  not 
represent  himself  to  be  registered  under  this  Act;  or 

(6.)  If  he  shows  that  he  has  been  registered  and  contin- 
ues to  be  entitled  to  be  registered  under  this  Act,  but  that 
his  name  has  been  erased  on  the  ground  only  that  he  has 
ceased  to  practice. 

2.  A  prosecution  for  such  offense  shall  be  instituted 
only  as  hereinafter  mentioned. 

If  a  person  takes  or  uses  the  designation  of  any  quali- 
fication or  certificate  in  relation  to  dentistry  or  dental  sur- 
gery, which  he  does  not  possess,  he  shall  be  liable,  on  sum- 
mary conviction  or  such  prosecution  as  hereinafter  mentioned, 
to  a  fine  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds. 

A  prosecution  for  any  of  the  offenses  above  in  this  Act 

*A11  words  in  Italics  were  enacted  by  the  Medical  Act,  1880,  sec.  2. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  353 

mentioned  (shall  not  be  instituted  by  a  private  person,  except 
with  the  consent  of  the  General  Council,  or  of  a  Branch  Coun- 
cil, but)  may  be  instituted  by  the  General  Council,  by  a 
Branch  Council,  or  by  a  medical  authority,  if  such  Council 
or  authority  thinks  fit,  or  by  a  private  person. 

Sec  5.  A  person  registered  under  this  Act  shall  be  enti- 
tled to  practice  dentistry  and  dental  surgery  in  any  part  of  Her 
Majesty's  dominions,  subject  to  any  local  law  in  force  m  that 
part,  and,  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  August,  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  a  person  shall  not  be 
entitled  to  recover  any  fee  or  charge,  in  any  court,  for  the 
performance  of  any  dental  operation,  or  for  any  dental  attend- 
ance or  advice,  unless  he  is  registered  under  this  Act  or  is  a 
legally  qualified  medical  practitioner. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who — 

(a)  Any  person  who  is  a  licentiate  in  dental  surgery  or 
dentistry  of  any  of  the  medical  authorities ;  or 

(b)  Is  entitled,  as  hereinafter  mentioned,  to  be  registered 
as  a  foreign  or  colonial  dentist ;  or 

(c)  Is  at  the  passage  of  this  Act  bona  fide  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  either  separately  or 
in  conjunction  with  the  practice  of  medicine,  surgery  or 
pharmacy,  shall  be  entitled  to  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec  7.  Where  a  person  entitled  to  be  registered  under  this 
Act  produces  or  sends  to  the  General  Registrar  the  document 
•conferring  or  evidencing  his  license  or  qualification,  with  a 
statement  of  his  name  and  address,  and  the  other  particu- 
lars, if  any,  required  for  registration,  and  pays  the  regula- 
tion fee,  he  shall  be  registered  in  the  dentists'  register. 

Provided,  that  a  person  shall  not  be  registered  under 
this  Act  as  having  been,  at  the  passing  thereof,  engaged  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry,  unless  he  produce  or  transmit  to 
the  Registrar,  before  the  first  day  of  August,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  information  of  his  name 
and  address,  and  a  declaration  signed  by  him  in  the  form  in 
the  schedule  to  this  Act,  or  to  the  like  effect ;  and  that  the 
Registrar  may,  if  he  sees  fit,  require  the  truth  of  such  decla- 
ration to  be  affirmed  in  manner  provided  for  by  the  Act  of 


354  APPENDIX. 

the  session  held  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  years  of  the  reign  of 
King  William  the  Fourth,  chapter  sixty-two,  entitled  "An 

Act  to  repeal  an  Aet  of  the  present  session  of  Parliament, 
[entitled  'An  Act  for  the  more  effectual  abolition  of  oaths 
and  affirmations  taken  and  made  in  various  departments  of 
the  State,  and  to  substantiate  declarations  in  lieu  thereof, 
and  for  the  more  entire  suppression  of  voluntary  and  ex- 
trajudicial oaths  and  affidavits,']  and  to  make  other  pro- 
visions for  the  abolition  of  unnecessary  oaths."* 

A  person  resident  in  the  United  Kingdom  shall  not  be 
disqualified  for  being  registered  under  this  Act  by  reason 
that  he  is  not  a  British  subject;  and  a  British  subject  shall 
not  be  disqualified  for  being  registered  under  this  Act  by 
reason  of  his  being  resident  or  engaged  in  practice  beyond 
the  limits  of  the  United  Kingdom. 

Sec.  8.  Where  a  person  who  either  is  not  domiciled  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  or  has  practiced  for  more  than  ten 
years  elsewhere  than  in  the  United  Kingdom,  or  in  the  case 
of  persons  practicing  in  the  United  Kingdom  at  the  time  of 
the  passing  of  this  Act  for  not  less  than  ten  years  either  in 
the  United  Kingdom  or  elsewhere,  shows  that  he  holds  some 
recognized  certificate  (as  hereinafter  defined)  granted  in  a 
British  possession,  and  that  he  is  of  good  character,  such 
person  shall,  upon  payment  of  the  registration  fee,  be  en- 
titled, without  examination  in  the  United  Kingdom,  to  be 
registered  as  a  colonial  dentist  in  the  dentists'  register. 

Sec.  9.  Where  a  person  who  is  not  a  British  subject,  or 
who  has  practiced  for  more  than  ten  years  elsewhere  than  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  or  in  the  case  of  persons  practicing  in 
the  United  Kingdom  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act 
for  not  less  than  ten  years,  either  in  the  United  Kingdom  or 
elsewhere,  shows  that  he  obtained  some  recognized  certificate 
(as  hereinafter  defined)  granted  in  a  foreign  country,  and 
that  he  is  of  good  character,  and  either  continues  to  hold 
such  certificate,  or  has  not  been  deprived  thereof  for  any 

*A11  the  words  inclosed  between  brackets  have  been  repealed  by  the  Med- 
ical Act,  1886,  section  26,  in  which  it  is  enacted  that  "a  prosecution  for  any 
such  offense  may  be  instituted  by  a  private  person  accordingly." 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  355 

cause  which  disqualifies  him  from  being  registered  under 
this  Act,  such  person  shall,  upon  payment  of  the  registration 
fee,  be  entitled,  without  examination  in  the  United  King- 
dom, to  be  registered  as  a  foreign  dentist  in  the  dentists* 
register. 

Sec.  10.  The  certificate  granted  in  a  British  possession 
or  in  a  foreign  country,  which  is  to  be  deemed  such  a  recog- 
nized certificate  as  is  required  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act, 
shall  be  such  certificate,  diploma,  membership,  degree, 
license,  letters,  testimonial,  or  other  title,  status,  or  docu- 
ment, as  may  be  recognized  for  the  time  being  by  the  Gen- 
eral Council  as  entitling  the  holder  thereof  to  practice  den- 
tistry or  dental  surgery  in  such  possession  or  country,  and  as 
furnishing  sufficient  guarantees  of  the  possession  of  the 
requisite  knowledge  and  skill  for  the  efficient  practice  of 
dentistry  or  dental  surgery.  If  a  person  is  refused  registra- 
tion as  a  colonial  dentist  or  as  a  foreign  dentist,  the  General 
Eegistrar  shall,  if  required  by  him,  state  in  writing  the  rea- 
son for  such  refusal,  and,  if  such  reason  be  that  the  certificate 
held  or  obtained  by  him  is  not  such  a  recognized  certificate 
as  above  defined,  such  person  may  appeal  to  the  Privy  Coun- 
cil, and  the  Privy  Council,  after  hearing  the  General  Council, 
may  dismiss  the  appeal,  or  may  order  the  General  Council  to 
recognize  such  certificate,  and  such  order  shall  be  duly  obeyed. 

Sec  11.  A  register  shall  be  kept  by  the  General  Regis- 
trar, to  be  styled  the  dentists'  register,  and  that  register 
shall — ■ 

(a.)  Contain  in  one  alphabetical  list  all  the  United  King- 
dom dentists — that  is  to  say,  all  persons  who  are  registered 
under  this  Act  as  having  been,  at  the  passing  thereof,  en- 
gaged in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  and  all 
persons  who  are  registered  as  licentiates  in  dentistry  or  den- 
tal surgery,  of  any  of  the  medical  authorities  of  the  United 
Kingdom  ;  and 

(b.)  Contain  in  a  separate  alphabetical  list  all  such  colo- 
nial dentists  as  are  registered  in  pursuance  of  this  Act;  and, 

(c.)  Contain  in  a  separate  alphabetical  list  all  such  colo- 
nial dentists  as  are  registered  in  pursuance  of  this  Act. 


356  APPENDIX. 

The  dentists'  register  shall  contain  the  said  lists  made 
out  alphabetically,  according  to  the  surnames, and  shall  state 
the  full  nanus  mid  addresses  of  the  registered  persons,  the 
description  and  date  of  qualification  in  respect  of  which  they 
are  registered,  and,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
shall  contain  such  particulars,  and  be  in  such  form,  as  the 
General  Council  from  time  to  time  direct. 

The  General  Council  shall  cause  a  correct  copy  of  the 
dentists'  register  to  be,  from  time  to  time,  and  at  least  once 
a  year,  printed  under  their  directions,  and  published  and 
sold,  which  copy  shall  be  admissible  in  evidence. 

The  dentists'  register  shall  be  deemed  to  be  in  proper 
custody  when  in  the  custody  of  the  General  Registrar,  and 
shall  be  of  such  a  public  nature  as  to  be  admissible  as  evi- 
dence of  all  matters  therein  on  its  mere  production  from  that 
custom. 

Every  Local  Registrar  shall  keep  such  register  and  per- 
form such  duties  in  relation  to  registration  under  this  Act 
as  the  General  Council  from  time  to  time  direct,  and  receive 
such  remuneration  out  of  the  registration  fees  as  the  General 
Council  assign  him. 

Every  Registrar  shall,  in  all  respects,  in  the  execution  of 
his  discretion  and  duty  in  relation  to  register  under  this  Act, 
conform  to  any  orders  made  by  the  General  Council  under 
this  Act,  and  to  any  special  directions  given  by  the  General 
Council. 

The  General  Council  may,  if  they  see  fit,  from  time 
to  time  make,  and,  when  made,  revoke  and  vary  orders  from 
the  registration  in  (on  payment  of  the  fee  fixed  by  the  orders) 
and  the  removal  from  the  dentists'  register  of  any  additional 
diplomas,  memberships,  degrees,  licenses,  or  letters  held  by 
a  person  registered  therein,  which  appear  to  the  Council  to 
be  granted  after  examination  by  any  of  the  medical  authori- 
ties in  respect  of  a  higher  degree  of  knowledge  than  is  re- 
quired to  obtain  a  certificate  of  fitness  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  12.  The  General  Registrar  shall,  from  time  to 
time,  insert  in  the  dentists'  register  any  alteration  which 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  357 

may  come  to  his  knowledge  in  the  name  or  address  of  any 
person  registered. 

2.  The  General  Registrar  shall  erase  from  the  dentists' 
register  the  name  of  every  deceased  person. 

3.  The  General  Registrar  may  erase  from  the  dentists' 
register  the  name  of  a  person  who  has  ceased  to  practice,  but 
not  (save  as  hereinafter  provided)  without  the  consent  of  that 
person ;  and  the  General  Registrar  may  send  by  post  to  a 
person  registered  in  the  dentists'  register,  a  notice  inquiring 
whether  or  not  he  has  ceased  to  practice,  or  has  changed  his 
residence ;  and,  if  the  General  Registrar  does  not,  within 
three  months  after  sending  the  notice,  receive  any  answer- 
thereto  from  the  said  person,  he  may,  within  fourteen  days 
after  the  expiration  of  the  three  months,  send  him  by  post  in 
a  registered  letter  another  notice,  referring  to  the  first  notice,, 
and  stating  that  no  answer  thereto  has  been  received  by  the 
Registrar,  and,  if  the  General  Registrar,  either  before  the- 
second  notice,  receives  the  first  notice  back  from  the  dead 
letter  office  of  the  Postmaster-General,  or  receives  the  second, 
notice  back  from  that  office,  or  does  not,  within  three  months 
after  sending  the  second  notice,  receive  any  answer  thereto 
from  the  said  person,  that  person  shall,  from  the  purpose  of 
the  present  section,  be  deemed  to  have  ceased  to  practice,  and 
his  name  may  be  erased  accordingly. 

4.  In  the  execution  of  his  duties  the  General  Registrar 
shall  act  on  such  evidence  as  in  each  case  appears  sufficient. 

Sec.  13.  The  General  Council  shall  cause  to  be  erased 
from  the  dentists'  register  an  entry  which  has  been  incorrectly 
or  fraudulently  made. 

Where  a  person  registered  in  the  dentists'  register  has- 
either  before  or  after  the  passing  of  this  Act,  and  either  be- 
fore or  after  he  is  so  registered,  been  convicted,  either  in  Her 
Majesty's  dominions  or  elsewhere,  of  an  offense  which,  it 
committed  in  England,  would  be  a  felony  or  misdemeanor,. 
or  been  guilty  of  any  infamous  or  disgraceful  conduct  in  a 
professional  respect,  that  person  shall  be  liable  to  have  his 
name  erased  from  the  register. 

The  General  Council  may,  and  upon  the  application  of 


•"-■Vs  APPENDIX. 

any  of  the  medical  authorities  shall,  cause  inquiry  to  be  made 
into  the  case  of  a  person  alleged  to  be  liable  to  have  his  name 
erased  under  this  section  ;  and,  on  proof  of  such  conviction, 
or  of  such  infamous  or  disgraceful  conduct,  shall  cause  the 
name  of  such  person  to  be  erased  from  the  register ;  provided, 
that  the  name  of  a  person  shall  not  be  erased  under  this 
section  on  account  of  his  adopting  or  refraining  from  adopt- 
ing the  practice  of  any  particular  theory  of  dentistry  or  den- 
tal surgery,  nor  on  account  of  a  conviction  for  a  political 
offense  out  of  Her  Majesty's  dominions,  nor  on  account  of  a 
conviction  for  an  offense  which,  though  within  the  provi- 
sions of  this  section,  does  not,  either  from  the  trivial  nature  of 
the  offense,  or  from  the  circumstances  under  which  it  was 
committed,  disqualify  a  person  from  practicing  dentistry. 
Any  name  erased  from  the  register  in  pursuance  of  this  sec- 
tion, shall  also  be  erased  from  the  list  of  licentiates  in  dental 
surgery  or  dentistry  of  the  medical  authority  of  which  such 
person  is  a  licentiate. 

Sec.  14.  Where  the  General  Council  direct  the  erasure 
from  the  dentists'  register  of  the  name  of  any  person,  or  of 
any  other  entry,  the  name  of  that  person,  or  that  entry,  shall 
not  be  again  entered  in  the  register,  except  by  direction  of 
the  General  Council  or  by  order  of  a  court  of  competent  juris- 
diction. 

If  the  General  Council  think  fit  in  any  case,  they  may 
direct  the  General  Registrar  to  restore  to  the  dentists'  register 
any  name  or  entry  erased  therefrom,  either  without  fee  or  on 
payment  of  such  fee,  not  exceeding  the  registration  fee,  as 
the  General  Council  from  time  to  time  fix,  and  the  Registrar 
shall  restore  the  same  accordingly. 

The  name  of  any  person  erased  from  the  dentists'  regis- 
ter at  the  request  of  any  such  person,  or  with  his  consent,  shall, 
unless  it  might,  if  not  so  erased,  have  been  erased  by  order  of 
the  General  Council,  be  restored  to  the  register,  on  his  appli- 
cation, on  payment  of  such  fee,  not  exceeding  the  registration 
fee,  as  the  General  Council  from  time  to  time  fix. 

Where  the  name  of  a  person,  restored  to  the  register  in 
pursuance  of  this  section,  has  been  erased  from  the  list  of 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  359 

licentiates  in  dental  surgery,  or  dentistry,  of  any  medical 
authority,  that  name  shall  be  restored  to  the  list  of  licentiates. 

Sec.  15.  The  General  Council  shall, forthe  purpose  of  exer- 
cising in  any  case  the  powers  of  erasing  from  and  of  restoring 
to  the  dentists'  register  the  name  of  a  person,  or  an  entry,  as- 
certain the  facts  of  such  case  by  a  committee  of  their  own 
body,  not  exceeding  five  in  number,  of  whom  the  quorum 
shall  be  not  less  than  three,  and  a  report  of  the  committee 
shall  be  conclusive  as  to  the  facts  for  the  purpose  of  the  exer- 
cise of  the  said  powers  by  the  General  Council. 

The  General  Council  shall,  from  time  to  time,  appoint 
and  shall  always  maintain  a  committee  for  the  purpose  of 
this  section, and,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  section,  may, 
from  time  to  time,  determine  the  constitution  and  the  num- 
ber and  tenure  of  office  of  the  members  of  the  committee. 

The  committee,  from  time  to  time,  shall  meet  for  the  dis- 
patch of  business,  and,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  sec- 
tion and  of  any  regulation  from  time  to  time  made  by  the 
General  Council,  may  regulate  the  summoning,  notice,  place, 
management,  adjournment  of  such  meetings,  the  appointment 
of  a  chairman,  the  mode  of  deciding  questions,  and  generally 
the  transactions  and  management  of  business,  including  the 
quorum,  and,  if  there  is  a  quorum,  the  committee  may  act, 
notwithstanding  any  vacancy  in  their  body.  In  the  case  of 
any  vacancy,  the  committee  may  appoint  a  member  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council  to  fill  the  vacancy  until  the  next  meeting  of  that 
Council. 

A  committee  under  this  section  may,  for  the  purpose  of 
the  execution  of  their  duties  under  this  Act,  employ,  at  the 
expense  of  the  Council,  such  legal  or  other  assessor  or  assist- 
ants as  the  committee  think  necessary  or  proper. 

Sec.  16.  There  shall  be  payable  in  respect  of  the  registra- 
tion of  any  person  who,  before  the  first  day  of  January,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  applies  to  be  regis- 
tered under  this  Act,  a  fee  not  exceeding  two  pounds,  and,  in  re- 
spect of  the  registration  of  any  person  who  after  that  day  ap- 
plies to  be  registered,  a  fee  not  exceeding  five  pounds. 

Sec.  17.  Subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  General 


360  APPENDIX. 

Council  may,  from  time  to  time,  make,  alter,  and  revoke  such 
orders  and  regulations  as  they  see  lit  for  regulating  the  gen- 
eral register  and  the  local  registers,  and  the  practice  of  regis- 
tration under  this  Act,  and  the  fees  to  be  paid  in  respect 
thereof. 

EXAMINATIONS. 

Sec.  18.  Notwithstanding  anything  in  any  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment, charter,  or  other  document,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any 
of  the  medical  authorities  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  colleges 
or  bodies),  who  have  power  for  the  time  being  to  grant  sur- 
gical degrees,  from  time  to  time  to  hold  examinations,  for  the 
purpose  of  testing  the  fitness  of  persons  to  practice  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery,  who  may  be  desirous  of  being  so  examined r 
and  to  grant  certificates  of  such  fitness ;  and  any  person  who 
obtains  such  a  certificate  from  any  of  those  colleges  or  bodies 
shall  be  a  licentiate  in  dental  surgery  or  dentistry  of  such 
college  or  body,  and  his  name  shall  be  entered  on  a  list  of 
such  licentiates  to  be  kept  by  such  college  or  body  ;  each  of 
the  said  colleges  or  bodies  shall  admit  to  the  examinations,, 
held  by  them,  respectively,  under  this  section,  any  person 
desirous  of  being  examined,  who  has  attained  the  age  of 
twenty-one  years,  and  has  complied  with  the  regulations  in 
force  (if  any)  as  to  education  of  such  college  or  body. 

Sec.  19.  Subject  to  the  provisions  hereinafter  contained 
with  reference  to  a  Medical  Board,  the  Council,  or  the  other 
governing  body  of  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  of  Edin- 
burgh, and  of  the  Faculty  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons  of  Glas- 
gow, and  of  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  in  Ireland,  and  of 
any  university  in  the  United  Kingdom,  respectively,  may,  from 
time  to  time,  appoint  a  Board  of  Examiners  for  the  purpose 
of  conducting  the  examinations  and  granting  the  certificates 
hereinbefore  mentioned. 

Each  of  such  boards  shall  be  called  the  Board  of  Examiners 
in  Dental  Surgery  or  Dentistry,  and  shall  consist  of  not  less 
than  six  members,  one-half  of  whom  at  least  shall  be  persons 
registered  under  this  Act,  and  such  registration  shall  (not- 
withstanding anything  in  any  Act  of  Parliament,  charter,  or 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  361 

other  document),  be  deemed  the  only  qualification  necessary 
for  the  membership  of  such  board.  The  persons  appointed 
by  each  such  Council  or  other  governing  body  shall  continue 
in  office  for  such  period,  and  shall  conduct  the  examinations 
in  such  manner,  and  shall  grant  certificates  in  such  form,  as 
such  Council  or  other  governing  body  may,  from  time  to  time, 
by  by-laws  or  regulations,  respectively,  direct. 

A  casual  vacancy  in  any  such  Board  of  Examiners  may 
be  filled  by  the  Council  or  other  governing  body  which  ap- 
pointed such  board,  but  the  person  so  appointed  shall  be 
qualified  as  the  person  in  whose  stead  he  is  appointed  was 
qualified,  and  shall  hold  office  for  such  time  only  as  the  person 
in  whose  stead  he  is  appointed  would  have  held  office. 

Sec.  20.  Such  reasonable  fees  shall  be  paid  for  the  cer- 
tificate to  be  granted  under  this  Act  by  the  Board  of  Exami- 
ners of  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  of  Edinburgh,  the 
Faculty  of  Physicians  and  Surgeons  of  Glasgow,  and  of  the 
Royal  College  of  Surgeons  in  Ireland,  and  of  any  such  uni- 
versity as  aforesaid,  respectively,  as  the  Council  or  other  gov- 
erning body  of  each  of  those  colleges  or  bodies  may,  from 
time  to  time,  by  by-laws  or  regulations,  respectively,  direct. 

Sec.  21.  The  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  of  England  shall 
continue  to  hold  examinations,  and  to  appoint  a  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers in  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  for  the  purpose  of 
testing  the  fitness  of  persons  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery,  who  may  be  desirous  of  being  so  examined,  and  to 
grant  certificates  of  such  fitness,  subject  and  according  to  the 
provisions  of  their  charter,  dated  the  eighth  day  of  Septem- 
ber, one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty-nine,  and  the 
by-laws  made  or  to  be  made,  in  pursuance  thereof;  and  any 
person  who  obtains  such  a  certificate  shall  be  a  licentiate  in 
dental  surgery  of  the  said  college,  and  his  name  shall  be 
entered  on  a  list  of  such  licentiates  to  be  kept  by  the  said 
college. 

Sec  22.  Every  medical  authority  shall,  from  time  to 
time,  when  required  by  the  General  Council,  furnish  such 
Council  with  such  information  as  such  Council  may  require 
as  to  the  course  of  study  and  examination  to  be  gone  through 


302  APPENDIX. 

in  order  to  obtain  such  certificates  as  arc  in  this  Act  men- 
tioned, and  generally  as  to  the  requisites  for  obtaining  such 
certificates;  and  any  member  or  members  of  the  General 
Council,  or  any  person  or  persons  deputed  tor  this  purpose 
by  such  Council,  or  by  any  branch  Council,  may  attend  and 
be  present  at  any  such  examinations. 

Sec.  23.  AVhere  it  appears  to  the  General  Council  that 
the  course  of  study  and  examinations  to  be  gone  through  in 
order  to  obtain  such  certificate,  as  in  this  Act  mentioned,  from 
any  of  the  said  colleges  or  bodies,  are  not  such  as  to  secure 
the  possession  by  persons  obtaining  such  certificate  of  the 
requisite  knowledge  and  skill  for  the  efficient  practice  of 
dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  the  General  Council  may  repre- 
sent the  same  to  Her  Majesty's  Privy  Council. 

Sec.  24.  The  Privy  Council,  on  any  representation  made 
as  aforesaid,  may,  if  they  see  fit,  order  that  a  certificate 
granted  by  any  such  college  or  body,  after  such  time  as  may 
be  mentioned  in  the  order,  shall  not  confer  any  right  to  be 
registered  under  this  Act.  Any  such  order  may  be  revoked 
by  the  Privy  Council  on  its  being  made  to  appear  to  them, 
by  further  representation  from  the  General  Council  or  other- 
wise, that  such  college  or  body  has  made  effectual  provision, 
to  the  satisfaction  of  the  General  Council,  for  the  improve- 
ment of  such  course  of  study  or  examination. 

Sec.  25.  After  the  time  mentioned  in  this  behalf  in  any 
euch  order  in  Council,  no  person  shall  be  entitled  to  be  reg- 
istered under  this  Act  in  respect  of  a  certificate  granted  by 
the  college  or  body  to  which  such  order  relates,  after  the  time 
herein  mentioned,  and  the  revocation  of  any  such  order  shall 
not  entitle  any  person  to  be  registered  in  respect  of  a  certifi- 
cate granted  before  such  revocation. 

Sec.  26.  If  it  appears  to  the  General  Council  that  an 
attempt  has  been  made  by  any  medical  authority  to  impose 
on  any  candidate  offering  himself  for  examination,  an  obliga- 
tion to  adopt  or  refrain  from  adopting  the  practice  of  any 
particular  theory  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  as  a  test  or 
condition  of  admitting  him  to  examination,  or  granting  a 
certificate  of  fitness  under  this  Act,  the  General  Council  may 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  363 

represent  the  same  to  the  Privy  Council,  and  the  Privy  Coun- 
cil may  thereupon  issue  an  injunction  to  the  authority  so 
directing  them  to  desist  from  such  practice  ;  and,  in  event  of 
their  not  complying  therewith,  then  to  order  that  such  author- 
ity shall  cease  to  have  power  to  confer  any  right  to  be  regis- 
tered under  this  Act  so  long  as  they  continue  such  practice. 

Sec  27.  A  certificate  under  this  Act  shall  not  confer 
any  right  or  title  to  be  registered  under  the  Medical  Act,  1858, 
in  respect  of  such  certificate,  nor  to  assume  any  name,  title, 
or  designation  implying  that  the  person  mentioned  in  the 
certificate  is  by  law  recognized  as  a  licentiate  or  practi- 
tioner in  medicine  or  general  surgery. 

Sec  28.  In  the  event  of  a  board  being  at  any  time  after 
the  passage  of  this  Act  established,  whether  under  the  name 
•of  a  medical  board  or  otherwise,  for  nominating,  on  behalf 
of  any  two  or  more  of  the  medical  authorities,  examiners  of 
persons  desirous  of  practicing  medicine  or  surgery,  whether 
such  board  (in  this  Act  referred  to  as  a  medical  board)  is 
established  under  the  Medical  Act,  1858,  or  otherwise,  a 
person  shall  not  receive  a  certificate  of  fitness  to  practice  as 
a  dentist  from  any  medical  authority  represented  on  such 
board,  or,  if  such  board  is  established  for  the  whole  of  Eng- 
land, Scotland  or  Ireland,  shall  not  be  entitled  to  be'  reeis- 
tered  in  respect  of  any  certificate  obtained  in  England,  Scot- 
land or  Ireland,  as  the  case  may  be,  unless  he  has  obtained 
from  such  board  a  certificate  that  he  has  shown  by  examina- 
tion that  he  is  qualified  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  sur- 
gery ;  provided,  that  one-half  at  least  of  the  examiners  at 
any  such  examination  shall  be  persons  registered  under  this 
Act.  The  Medical  Board  shall,  in  such  manner  as  may  be 
from  time  to  time  directed  by  the  General  Council,  certify 
to  the  General  Registrar  and  to  the  medical  authorities  the 
persons  who  have  shown  by  examination  that  they  are  qual- 
ified to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  and  every  per- 
son so  certified  shall,  on  application,  receive  from  the  Royal 
College  of  Surgeons  of  England,  or  the  Royal  College  of  Sur- 
geons of  Edinburgh,  or  the  Faculty  of  Physicians  and  Sur- 
geons of  Glasgow,  or  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  of  Ireland, 


3».i4  APPENDIX. 

a  certificate  of  fitness  constituting  such  person  a  licentiate  in 
dental  surgery  or  dentistry  of  such  college  or  faculty.  If 
a  medical  authority  certify  to  the  General  Registrar  the 
names  and  addresses  of  the  persons  who,  having  been  so  cer- 
tified by  a  Medical  Board,  have  received  certificates  from 
that  authority,  together  with  the  other  particulars  required 
for  the  registration  of  such  persons,  the  General  Registrar 
may,  upon  payment  of  the  registration  fee,  register  every 
such  person  in  the  dentists'  register  without  application 
from  that  person. 

The  General  Council  shall  have  the  same  power  of  mak- 
ing rules  respecting  the  examination  of  persons  desiring  to 
obtain  certificates  of  being  qualified  to  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery,  as  they  have  for  the  time  being  in  respect  of 
the  examination  of  persons  desiring  to  obtain  a  qualification 
to  practice  medicine  and  surgery,  and  there  shall  be  the  same 
right  of  appeal  to  the  Privy  Council  against  such  rules. 

The  General  Council  and  the  Privy  Council  shall  have 
the  same  control  over  the  medical  board,  so  far  as  regards 
the  examination  of  persons  desiring  to  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery,  as  they  have  as  regards  the  examination  of 
persons  desiring  to  practice  medicine  and  surgery,  and  shall 
have  the  same  power  of  dismissing  the  members  of  such 
board. 

The  General  Council  may  cause  to  be  framed,  and  may 
approve,  and,  when  approved,  submit  to  the  Privy  Council 
a  scheme  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  with 
respect  to  a  medical  board,  and  rules  respecting  examina- 
tions ;  and  for  extending,  with  or  without  any  exception  or 
modification,  to  the  examination  of  persons  desirous  of  prac- 
ticing dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  the  provisions  of  any  Act 
for  the  time  being  in  force,  with  respect  to  the  examination 
of  persons  desiring  to  practice  medicine  or  surgery,  and  any 
such  scheme,  when  confirmed  by  the  Privy  Council,  shall 
have  full  effect. 

Any  such  scheme  may  provide  for  the  fees  to  be  paid 
on  admission  to  the  examinations,  and  for  the  application 
of  such  fees  for  public  purposes,  and  generally  for  such  mat- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 


365 


ters  as  appear  to  be  necessary  or  proper  for  carrying  into  effect 
the  scheme  and  regulating  the  examinations. 

It  shall  be  lawful  for  Her  Majesty,  at  any  time  after  the 
said  appointed  day,  to  declare  by  order  in  Council  that  section 
28  of  the  said  Dentists'  Act,  1878,  shall  be  in  force  on  and  after 
a  day  to  be  named  in  such  order,  but,  in  the  meantime,  until 
such  order  has  been  made,  and  before  such  day  as  last  aforesaid, 
such  section  shall  not  be  deemed  to  be  in  force. 

Enacted  by  the  Medical  Act,  1886,  section  26. 


TABLE  OF  REGISTRABLE  QUALIFICATIONS. 

(To  Practice  Dentistry  in  the  United  Kingdom.) 
WITH  ABBREVIATIONS  USED  TO  DENOTE  THEM. 


OQ 

•A 
O 

Qualifications. 

Abbreviations. 

< 

O 

5 

■< 

D 

<y 

■< 

O 

>-* 
O 

G 

United  Kingdom 
Dentists. 

"  Licentiate  in  Dental  Surgery  of  the  Royal 
College  of  Surgeons  of  England. 

Licentiate  in  Dental  Surgery  of  the  Royal 
College  of  Surgeons  in  Edinburgh. 

Licentiate  in  Dental  Surgery  of  the  Faculty 
of  Physicians  and  Surgeons  of  Glasgow. 

Licentiate  in  Dental  Surgery  of  the  Royal 
_     College  of  Surgeons  in  Ireland. 

Lie.    Den.    R.    Coll. 
Surg.  Eng. 

Lie.    Den.    R.    Coll. 
Surg.  Edin. 

Lie.  Den.  Surg.  Fac. 
Phys.  Surg.  Glasg. 

Lie.    Den.    Surg.    R. 
Coll.  Surg.  Irel. 

■J 

g 
5 
5 
c 

<^m  [  Doctor  of  Dental  Medicine  of  the  Univer- 
2  to  1      sity  of  Harvard. 

o  a  |  Doctor  of  Dental  Surgery  of  the  Uni^er- 
^  Q   [     sity  of  Michigan. 

D.  D.  M.  Univ.  Harv. 
D.  D.  S.  Univ.  Mich. 

SUPPLEMENTAL. 


Sec.  29.  A  copy  of  the  register  of  dentists  for  the  time  being, 
purporting  to  be  printed  and  published  in  pursuance  of  this 
Act,  shall  be  evidence  in  all  cases  (until  the  contrary  be  made 
to  appear)  that  the  person  therein    specified    is  registered 


366  APPENDIX, 

according  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  the  absence  of 
the  name  of  any  person  from  such  copy  shall  be  evidence 
(until  the  contrary  be  made  to  appear)  that  such  person  is 
not  registered  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act ;  pro- 
vided, that,  in  the  case  of  any  person  whose  name  does  not  ap- 
pear in  such  copy,  a  certified  copy,  under  the  hand  of  the 
Registrar  of  the  General  Council,  of  the  entry  of  the  name  of 
such  person  in  the  dentists'  register,  shall  be  evidence  that  such 
person  is  registered  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 
The  following  copies  of  any  orders  made  in  pursuance  of 
the  Medical  Act  or  Acts,  or  the  Dentists'  Act,  1878,  shall  be  evi- 
dence; thai  is  to  say, 

1.  Any  copy  purporting  to  he  printed  by  the  Queen's  printer \ 
or  by  any  other  printer,  in  pursuance  of  an  authority  given  by  the 
General  Council  ; 

2.  Any  copy  of  an  order,  certified  to  be  a  true  copy  by  the 
Registrar  of  the  General  Councilor  by  any  other  person  appointed 
by  the  General  Council,  either  in  addition  to  or  in  exclusion  of 
the  Registrar  to  certify  to  such  orders.  (Enacted  by  the  Medical 
Act  of  1886;  section  26.) 

Sec.  30.  Every  person  registered  under  this  Act  shall  be  ex- 
empt, if  he  so  desires,  from  serving  on  all  juries  and  inquests 
whatsoever,  and  from  serving  all  corporate,  parochial,  ward, 
hundred,  and  township  offices,  and  from  serving  in  the  militia; 
and  the  name  of  any  registered  person  shall  not  be  returned 
in  any  of  the  persons  liable  to  serve  in  the  militia,  or  any 
such  office  as  aforesaid. 

Sec.  31.  The  powers,  by  this  Act  vested  in  the  Privy 
Council,  may  be  exercised  by  any  two  or  more  of  the  Lords 
and  others  of  Her  Majesty's  Most  Honorable  Privy  Council. 

Any  order  made  by  the  Privy  Council,  or  any  appeal  to 
them  under  this  Act,  may  be  made  conditionally  or  uncon- 
ditionally, and  may  contain  such  terms  and  directions  as  to 
the  Privy  Council  seem  just. 

Sec  32.  All  moneys  arising  from  fees  paid  on  registra- 
tion, or  from  the  sale  of  copies  of  the  registers,  or  otherwise 
received  by  the  General  Council  under  this  Act,  shall  be  ap- 
plied in  accordance  with  such  regulations  as  may  be,  from 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  367 

time  to  time,  made  by  the  General  Council,  in  defraying  the 
expenses  of  registration  and  the  other  expenses  of  the  execu- 
tion of  this  Act,  and  subject  thereto,  towards  the  support  of 
museums,  libraries,  or  lectureships,  or  for  public  purposes 
connected  with  the  profession  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery, 
or  towards  the  promotion  of  learning  and  education  in  con- 
nection with  dentistry  or  dental  surgery. 

The  Treasurers  of  the  General  and  Branch  Councils  shall 
enter  in  books,  to  be  kept  for  that  purpose,  a  true  account  of 
all  sums  of  money  by  them  received  and  paid  under  this 
Act ;  and  such  accounts  shall  be  submitted  by  them  to  the 
General  Council  and  Branch  Council,  respectively,  at  such 
times  as  the  Councils  may  respectively  require.  Such  ac- 
counts shall  be  published  annually,  and  shall  be  laid  before 
both  Houses  of  Parliament  in  the  month  of  March  in  every 
year,  if  Parliament  be  then  sitting,  or,  if  Parliament  be  not 
sitting,  then  within  one  month  after  the  commencement  of 
the  next  sitting  of  Parliament. 

Sec.  34.  Any  Register  who  willfully  makes,  or  causes  to 
be  made,  any  falsification  in  any  matter  relating  to  any  reg- 
ister under  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor 
in  England,  or  Ireland,  or  in  Scotland,  of  a  crime  or  offense 
punishable  by  fine  or  imprisonment,  and  shall,  on  conviction 
thereof,  be  liable  to  be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not  exceed- 
ing twelve  months. 

Sec  35.  Any  person  who  willfully  procures,  or  attempts 
to  procure,  himself  to  be  registered  under  this  Act,  by  mak- 
ing or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or  produced,  any 
false  or  fraudulent  representation  or  declaration,  either  ver- 
bally or  in  writing,  and  any  person  aiding  and  assisting  him 
therein,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  in  Eng- 
land, and  Ireland,  and  in  Scotland,  of  a  crime  or  offense  pun- 
ishable by  fine  or  imprisonment,  and  shall,  on  conviction 
thereof,  be  liable  to  be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not  exceed- 
ing twelve  months. 

Sec  36.  Every  Registrar  of  deaths  in  the  United  King- 
dom, on  receiving  notice  of  the  death  of  any  person  regis- 
tered under  this  Act,  shall  forthwith  transmit  by  post  to  the 


3G8  APPENDIX. 

Registrar  of  the  General  Council,  and  to  the  Registrar  of  the 
Branch  Council  for  that  part  of  the  United  Kingdom  in 
which  the  deaths  occurs,  a  certificate  under  his  own  hand  of 
such  death,  with  the  particulars  of  time  and  place  of  death, 
and  may  charge  the  cost  of  such  certificate  and  transmission 
as  an  expense  of  his  office. 

Sec.  37.  Any  person  who  has  been  articled  as  a  pupil,  and 
has  paid  a  premium  to  a  dental  practitioner  entitled  to  be 
registered  under  this  Act,  in  consideration  of  receiving  from 
such  practitioner  a  complete  dental  education,  shall,  if  his 
articles  expire  before  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  eighty,  be  entitled  to  register  under  this 
Act  as  though  he  had  been  in  bonaf.de  practice  before  the 
passing  of  this  Act.  Moreover,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the 
General  Council,  by  special  order,  to  dispense  with  such  of  the 
certificates,  examinations,  or  other  conditions  for  registration 
in  the  dentists'  register  required  under  the  provision  of  this 
Act,  or  under  any  by-laws,  orders,  or  regulations  made  by  its 
authority,  as  to  them  ma}'  seem  fit,  in  favor  of  any  dental  stu- 
dents or  apprentices  who  have  commenced  their  professional 
education  or  apprenticeship  before  the  passing  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  38.  All  by-laws,  orders  and  regulations  made  by  the 
General  Council,  or  by  any  medical  authority  under  the 
authority  of  this  Act,  shall  be  made,  and  may  be,  from  time 
to  time,  altered  or  revoked  in  such  manner,  and  subject  to 
such  approval  or  confirmation  (if  any)  as  in  the  case  of  other 
by-laws,  orders,  or  regulations,  made  by  such  medical  au- 
thority. 

Sec.  39.  Subject  to  the  other  provisions  of  this  Act,  all 
notices  and  documents  required  by  or  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act  to  be  sent,  may  be  sent  by  post,  and  shall  be  deemed  to 
have  been  received  at  the  time  when  the  letter  containing 
the  same  would  be  delivered  in  the  ordinary  course  of  the 
post ;  and,  if  proving  such  sending  it,  shall  be  sufficient  to 
prove  that  the  letter  containing  the  notice  or  document  was 
prepaid  and  properly  addressed,  and  put  into  the  post- 
Such  notices  and  documents  may  be  in  writing  or  in 
print,  or  partly  in  writing  and  partly  in  print,  and,  when  sent 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  369 

to  the  General  Council,  or  a  medical  board  or  a  medical  au- 
thority, shall  be  deemed  to  be  properly  addressed  if  addressed 
to  the  General  Council,  medical  board,  or  medical  authority, 
or  to  some  officer  of  such  Council,  board  or  authority,  at  the 
principal  office  or  place  of  business  of  such  Council,  board 
or  authority  ;  and,  when  sent  to  a  person  registered  in  the 
medical  register,  shall  be  deemed  to  be  properly  addressed 
if  addressed  to  him  according  to  his  address  registered  in 
that  register. 

Sec.  40.  All  fees  under  this  Act  may  be  recovered  as  or- 
•dinary  debts  due  to  the  General  Council,  and  all  penalties  under 
this  Act  may  be  recovered  and  enforced  as  follows,  that  is  to 
say :  In  England,  before  two  or  more  Justices  of  the  Peace,  in 
manner  directed  by  the  Act  of  the  session  of  the  eleventh 
and  twelfth  years  of  the  reign  of  Her  present  Majesty,  chap- 
ter forty-three,  entitled  "An  Act  to  facilitate  the  perform- 
ance of  the  duties  of  Justices  of  the  Peace,"  out  of  sessions, 
within  England  and  Wales,  with  respect  to  summary  convic- 
tions and  orders,  and  any  Act  amending  the  same ;  and  in  Scot- 
land, before  the  Sheriff  or  Sheriff's  substitute,  or  two  Jus- 
tices, in  manner  provided  by  the  Summary  Procedure  Act, 
1864,  and  any  Act  amending  the  same  ;  and  in  Ireland, 
within  the  police  district  of  Dublin  metropolis,  in  manner 
■directed  by  the  Acts  regulating  the  powers  and  duties  of 
Justices  of  the  Peace  for  such  district,  or  of  the  police  of 
such  district,  and  elsewhere  in  Ireland,  before  two  or  more 
Justices  of  the  Peace  in  manner  directed  by  the  Petty  Ses- 
sions (Ireland)  Act,  1851,  and  any  Act  amending  the  same. 

SCHEDULE. 

Declaration  required  to  be  made  by  a  person  who  claims 
to  be  registered  under  the  Dentists'  Act,  1878,  on  the  ground 
that  he  was  bona  fide  engaged  in  practice  of  dentistry  at  the 
date  of  the  passing  of  the  Dentists'  Act,  1878. 

I, ,  residing  at , 

hereby  declare  that  I  was  bona  fide  engaged   in  the  practice 


370  APPENDIX. 

of  dentist  rv  at ,  at  the  date  of  passing' 

the  Dentists'  Act,  1878. 

(Signed)  

(Witness)  

Dated  this  day  of ,  18 

Note. — Any  person  who  willfully  procures,  or  attempts 
to  procure,  himself  to  be  registered  under  this  Act,  by  mak- 
ing or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or  produced,  any 
false  or  fraudulent  representation  or  declaration,  either  ver- 
bally or  in  writing,  and  any  person  aiding  and  assisting  him 
therein,  is  liable  under  the  Dentists'  Act,  1878,  to  imprison- 
ment for  twelve  months. 

(This  Act  is  taken  from  the  Dentists'  Register,  printed 
and  published  under  the  direction  of  the  General  Council  of 
Medical  Education  and  Registration  of  the  United  Kingdom.) 


NEW  ZEALAND. 

The  New  Zealand  Dental  Act  was  passed  by  the  Xew 
Zealand  Parliament,  and  went  into  effect  after  the  first  day 
of  June,  1881,  provided  for  the  registration  of  dentists  quali- 
fied to  practice  in  the  country. 

The  qualifications  for  registration  are  both  for  colonial 
and  foreign  dentists,  that  they  shall  show  that  they  are  of 
good  moral  character,  and  shall  have  been  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  the  Act  bona  fide  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry or  dental  surgery,  either  separately,  or  in  conjunction 
with  the  practice  of  medicine,  surgery  or  pharmacy ;  or  that 
they  shall  show  that  they  hold  some  recognized  diploma, 
membership,  degree  or  license,  letters,  testimonial  or  other 
title,  status  or  document,  as  may  be  recognized  by  the  Board 
of  Examiners  (consisting  of  six  persons  appointed  by  the 
Senate  of  the  University  of  Xew  Zealand),  as  entitling  the 
holder  thereof  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  that 
colony,  and  as  furnishing  sufficient  guarantee  of  the  posses- 
sion of  the  requisite  knowledge  and  skill  for  the  efficient  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery.     A  fine  of  twenty  pounds- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  371 

is  imposed  upon  those  practicing  without  registration,  and  it  is 
provided  that  they  shall  not  be  entitled  to  recover  in  any 
court  any  fee  or  charge  for  the  performance  of  any  dental 
operation. 

The  Act  provides  for  an  appeal  from  the  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers, when  they  have  decided  adversely  to  the  claims  of 
an  applicant  for  registration,  to  the  Governor  in  Council,  who 
may,  upon  sufficient  evidence,  order  the  board  to  recognize 
the  certificate  or  qualification  of  the  applicant. 

A  penalty  of  imprisonment  for  a  term  not  exceeding 
twelve  months  is  imposed  upon  any  person  who  willfully  pro- 
cures, or  attempts  to  procure,  registration  under  the  Act  by 
false  or  fraudulent  representation. 

An  Act  to  Provide  for  the  Registration  of  Dentists  Qualified  to 
Practice  in  New  Zealand. 

Whereas,  it  is  desirable  to  provide  for  the  registration 
of  persons  practicing  as  dentists; 

Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  New  Zea- 
land in  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same, 
as  follows  : 

Section  1.  The  short  title  of  this  Act  is  "  The  Dentists' 
Act,  1880." 

Sec  2.  In  this  Act,  if  not  inconsistent  with  the  context, 
"  Senate  "  means  the  Senate  of  the  University  of  New  Zea- 
land ;  "  Dentist "  means  a  person  registered  under  this  Act ; 
"Registration"  and  "registered,"  respectively, mean  registra- 
tion under  this  Act  and  registered  under  this  Act ;  "The  said 
Act"  means  and  includes  the  Imperial  Act,  41  and  42  Vict., 
cap.  33,  and  entitled  "  The  Dentists'  Act,  1878 ;  "  Registrar- 
General  "  means  the  Registrar-General  of  births,  deaths,  and 
marriages. 

Sec  3.  From  and  after  the  first  day  of  June,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  eighty-one,  a  person  other  than  a  legally 
qualified  medical  practitioner  shall  not  be  entitled  to  take  or 
use  the  name  or  title  of  dentist  (either  alone  or  in  combination 
with  other  words),  or  of  dental  practitioner,  or  any  name,  title, 
addition,  or  description  implying  that  he  is  registered  under 


372  APPENDIX. 

this  Act,  or  that  lie  is  a  person  specially  qualified  to  practice 
dentistry,  unless  he  is  registered  under  this  Act. 

Any  person  who,  after  the  first  day  of  June,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  eighty-one,  not  being  registered  under  this 

Act,  takes  or  uses  any  such  name,  title,  addition,  or  descrip- 
tion as  aforesaid,  shall  be  liable,  on  summary  conviction,  to  a 
fine  of  not  exceeding  twenty  pounds  ;  provided,  that  nothing 
in  this  section  shall  apply  to  any  person  registered  under  the 
said  Act,  or  to  any  legally  qualified  medical  practitioner. 

Sec.  4.  A  person  registered  under  this  Act  shall  be  en- 
titled to  practice  dentistry  and  dental  surgery  in  any  part  of 
]S"ew  Zealand  ;  and,  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  June,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-one,  a  person  shall  not  be 
entitled  to  recover  any  fee  or  charge  in  any  court  for  the  per- 
formance of  any  dental  operation,  or  for  any  dental  attendance 
or  advice,  unless  he  is  registered  under  this  Act,  or  is  regis- 
tered under  the  said  Act,  or  is  a  legally  qualified  medical 
practitioner. 

Sec.  5.  Any  person  who — 

(a)  Is  registered  under  the  said  Act ; 

(b)  Is  entitled  to  be  registered  under  the  said  Act ; 

(c)  Is  at  the  passing  of  this  Act  bona  fide  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  and  dental  surgery,  either  separately  or 
in  conjunction  with  the  practice  of  medicine,  surgery,  or  phar- 
macy ;  or 

(d)  Is  entitled  to  be  registered  as  a  foreign  and  colonial 
dentist, 

shall  be  entitled  to  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec  6.  Any  person  showing  that  he  holds  some  recog- 
nized certificate,  as  hereinafter  defined,  granted  in  a  British 
possession,  and  that  he  is  of  good  character,  shall,  upon  pay- 
ment of  the  registration  fee,  be  entitled,  without  examination, 
to  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec  7.  Any  person  showing  that  he  holds  some  recog- 
nized certificate,  as  hereinafter  defined,  granted  in  a  foreign 
country,  and  that  he  is  of  good  character,  and  either  contin- 
ues to  hold  such  certificate  or  has  not  been  deprived  thereof 
for  any  cause  which  disqualifies  him  for  being  registered  un- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  373 

der  this  Act,  shall,  upon  payment  of  the  fees,  be  entitled,  with- 
out examination,  to  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec  8.  The  certificate  granted  in  a  British  possession  or 
in  a  foreign  country,  which  is  to  be  deemed  such  a  recognized 
certificate  as  is  required  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act,  shall 
be  such  a  certificate,  diploma,  membership,  degree,  license, 
letters,  testimonial,  or  other  title,  status  or  document  as  may 
be  recognized  by  the  Board  of  Examiners  as  entitling  the 
holder  thereof  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  such 
possession  or  country,  and  as  furnishing  sufficient  guarantee 
of  the  possession  of  the  requisite  knowledge  and  skill  for  the 
efficient  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery. 

Sec.  9.  If  a  person  is  refused  registration  as  a  colonial 
dentist,  or  as  a  foreign  dentist,  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall, 
if  required  by  him,  state  in  writing  the  reasou  for  such 
refusal ;  and,  if  such  reason  be  that  the  certificate  held  or 
obtained  by  him  is  not  such  a  recognized  certificate  as  above 
defined,  such  person  may  appeal  to  the  Governor  in  Council, 
and  the  Governor  in  Council  may,  after  hearing  the  Board  of 
Examiners,  order  the  Board  of  Examiners  to  recognize  such 
certificate,  and  such  order  shall  be  duly  obeyed. 

Sec  10.  When  a  person  entitled  to  be  registered  under 
this  Act  produces  or  sends  to  the  Registrar-General  the  docu- 
ment conferring  or  evidencing  his  qualification,  with  a  state- 
ment of  his  name  and  address,  and  the  other  particulars,  if 
any,  required  for  registration,  and  pays  the  registration  fee, 
he  shall  be  registered  in  the  Dentists'  Register ;  'provided,  that 
a  person  shall  not  be  registered  under  this  Act  as  having  been 
at  the  passing  thereof  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry, 
unless  he  produces  or  transmits  to  the  Registrar  before  the 
first  day  of  June,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-one, 
information  of  his  name  and  address,  and  a  declaration  signed 
by  him  in  the  form  of  the  Schedule  to  this  Act. 

'  Sec.  11.  The  Senate  may,  from  time  to  time,  appoint  a 
Board  or  Boards  of  Examiners  for  the  purpose  of  conducting 
examinations  and  granting  certificates  under  this  Act. 

Each  of  such  boards  shall  be  called  Board  of  Exami- 
ners in  dental  surgery  or  dentistry,  and  shall  consist  of  not 


374  APPENDIX. 

less  than  six  members,  who  shall  be  either  qualified  medical 
practitioners  or  persons  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  12.  The  persons  appointed  by  the  Senate  shall  con- 
tinue in  office  for  such  period,  ami  shall  conduct  the  exami- 
nation- in  such  manner,  and  shall  grant  certificates  in  such 
form,  as  such  Senate  may,  from  time  to  time,  by  by-laws  or 
regulations  respectively  direct. 

Sec.  13.  A  casual  vacancy  in  any  such  Board  of  Exami- 
ners may  he  filled  by  the  Senate  which  appointed  such  hoard, 
but  the  person  so  appointed  shall  he  qualified  as  the  person  in 
whose  stead  he  is  appointed,  and  shall  hold  office  for  such 
time  only  as  the  person  in  whose  stead  he  is  appointed  would 
have  held  office. 

Sec.  14.  Such  reasonable  fees  shall  be  paid  for  the  certifi- 
cates to  he  granted  under  this  Act  by  the  Board  of  Examiners, 
as  the  Senate  may,  from  time  to  time,  by  by-laws  or  regulations 
respectively  direct. 

Sec  15.  If  it  appears  to  the  Senate  that  an  attempt  has 
been  made  by  any  Board  of  Examiners,  to  impose  on  any 
candidate  offering  himself  for  examination  an  obligation  to 
adopt  or  refrain  from  adopting  the  practice  of  any  particular 
theory  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  as  a  test  or  condition 
of  admitting  him  to  examination  or  granting  a  certificate  of 
fitness  under  this  Act,  the  Senate  may  represent  the  same  to 
the  Governor  in  Council,  and  the  Governor  in  Council  may, 
thereupon,  issue  an  injunction  to  the  authority  so  acting,  di- 
recting them  to  desist  from  such  practice;  and,  in  the  event 
of  their  not  complying  therewith,  then  to  order  that  such 
authority  shall  cease  to  have  power  to  confer  any  right  to  be 
registered  under  this  Act  so  long  as  they  continue  such  prac- 
tice. 

Sec  16.  Any  person  who  willfully  procures,  or  attempts 
to  procure, himself  or  any  other  person  to  be  registered  under 
this  Act,  by  making  or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or 
produced,  any  false  or  fraudulent  representation  or  declaration, 
either  verbally  or  in  writing,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  shall,  on  conviction,  be  liable  to  be  im- 
prisoned for  any  term  not  exceeding  twelve  months. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  375 

Sec.  17.  Any  Registrar  who  willfully  makes,  or  causes  to 
"be  made,  any  falsification  in  any  matter  relating  to  any  reg- 
ister under  this  Act,  shall  be  liable  to  be  imprisoned  for  any 
term  not  exceeding  twelve  months. 

REGISTRATION. 

Sec.  18.  The  Registrar-General  shall  keep  in  his  office  a 
hook  in  which  shall  be  inserted  the  names  and  residences  of 
all  persons  registered  under  this  Act,  which  book  is  referred 
to  herein  as  the  "Register"  or  "Dentists'  Register." 

Sec.  19.  On  application  made  to  him  at  any  time  for 
that  purpose  by  any  registered  dentist,  the  Registrar-General 
shall  issue  to  such  applicant  a  certificate  of  registration. 

Sec.  20.  The  hook  as  aforesaid  shall  he  open  to  inspec- 
tion by  the  public. 

Sec.  21.  The  Registrar-General  shall,  from  time  to  time, 
erase  the  names  of  all  registered  persons  who  shall  have  died, 
and  shall,  from  time  to  time,  make  the  necessary  alterations 
in  the  addresses  of  the  persons  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  22.  A  true  copy  of  the  register  aforesaid,  certified 
by  the  Registrar-General  to  be  a  true  copy,  shall,  in  the 
month  of  December  in  each  year,  be  sent  to  the  Colonial 
Secretary,  and  shall  by  him  be  published  in  the  New  Zealand 
Gazette  of  the  colony;  and  any  copy  of  the  register  so  pub- 
lished shall  be  evidence  in  all  courts  of  law,  and  before  all 
Resident  Magistrates  and  Justices  of  the  Peace  and  others, 
that  the  persons  therein  specified  are  registered  according  to 
the  provisions  of  this  Act.  Provided,  that,  in  the  case  of  any 
person  whose  name  does  not  appear  in  such  copy,  a  certified 
copy,  under  the  hand  of  the  Registrar-General,  of  the  entry 
of  the  name  of  the  person,  shall  be  evidence  that  such  person 
is  registered. 

Sec.  23.  The  Registrar-General  shall  take  and  receive 
the  under-mentioned  fees : 

On  application One  pound. 

Certificate  of  registration Five  shillings. 

Any  alteration  of  register Five  shillings. 

Inspection  of  register Two  shillings. 


376  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  24.  All  fees  accruing  under  this  Act  shall  form  part 
of  the  Consolidated  Fund  of  the  colony. 

SCHEDULE. 

Declaration  required  to  be  made  by  a  person  who  claims 
to  be  registered  on  the  ground  that  he  was  bona  fide  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  at  the  date  of  the  passing  of 
"The  Dentists'  Act,  1880." 

I,  ,  residing  at ,  hereby  declare  that  I 

was  bona  fide  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  at ,  at 

the  date  of  the  passing  of  "  The  Dentists'  Act,  1880." 

(Signed) 
(Witness) 

Dated  this day  of ,  18.... 


An  Act  to  amend  "The  Dentists'  Act,  1880" 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  New  Zealand  in 
Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  The  short  title  of  this  Act  is  "  The  Dentists' 
Act,  1880,  Amendment  Act,  1881." 

Sec  2.  In  this  Act,  if  not  inconsistent  with  the  context, 
"The  said  Act"  means  "  The  Dentists'  Act,  1880." 

Sec  3.  In  addition  to  the  persons  mentioned  in  the  fifth 
section  of  the  said  Act,  as  being  entitled  to  be  registered  under 
the  said  Act,  the  following  persons  shall  be  entitled  to  be 
registered : 

1.  Any  person  who,  for  at  least  three  consecutive  years, 
has  been  the  apprentice  or  pupil  of  a  person  registered  under 
the  said  Act,  or  the  Imperial  Act  forty-one  and  forty-two 
Victoria,  chapter  thirty-three,  or  of  one  or  more  such  persons, 
and  who  has  been  continuously  and  wholly  engaged  during 
that  period  in  studying  the  theory  and  practice  of  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery,  and  shall  have  obtained  a  certificate  under 
the  eleventh  section  of  the  said  Act. 

2.  Any  person  who  shall  satisfy  the  Registrar-General 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  377 

that  lie  has  been  continuously  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry or  dental  surgery  in  lS"ew  Zealand  for  the  period  of  five 
years  immediately  preceding  the  coming  into  operation  of  the 
said  Act. 

Sec.  4.  In  all  cases  where  any  person  shall  apply  to  be  reg- 
istered under  the  said  Act,  the  Registrar-General  may  ex- 
amine any  such  applicant,  and  any  person  whom  he  may  deem 
capable  of  giving  evidence  respecting  such  applicant,  and 
may  conduct  any  such  examination  upon  oath,  and  for  such 
purpose  may  administer  oaths ;  and  he  may  decline  to  register 
such  person  if  for  any  reason  he  is  of  opinion  that  such  appli- 
cant is  not  really  entitled  to  be  registered  under  the  said  Act. 

Provided,  that  any  person  whose  application  has  been  re- 
fused under  this  section  may  appeal  to  a  Judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court  on  summons  in  a  summary  way  ;  and  such  Judge  may 
either  order  the  Registrar-General  to  register  such  applicant, 
or  may  support  the  Registrar-General's  decision,  and  may 
in  his  discretion  award  costs  against  the  Registrar-General, 
or  against  the  said  applicant. 

Sec.  5.  If  any  person  shall  have  procured  himself  to  be  reg- 
istered by  making  or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or 
produced,  any  false  or  fraudulent  representation  or  declaration, 
either  verbally  or  in  writing,  or  if  any  person  not  entitled  to 
be  registered  shall  have  been  registered,  or  if  any  registered 
person  shall  be  convicted  of  any  felony  or  misdemeanor  in 
Great  Britain  or  Ireland,  or  in  any  of  the  British  dominions, 
the  Registrar-General  shall  erase  the  name  of  any  such  per- 
son from  the  register,  and  such  erasure  shall  be  notified  by 
the  Registrar-General  in  the  Isnw  Zealand  Gazette. 

Sec  6.  The  words  "Any  Registrar  who,"  in  the  first  of  the 
seventeenth  section  of  the  said  Act,  are  hereby  struck  out,  and 
the  words"  If  the  Registrar-General"  inserted  in  place  thereof , 
and  the  word  "  he  "  shall  be  inserted  before  the  word  "  shall  " 
in  the  second  line  of  the  said  section. 

Sec  7.  Registration  under  the  said  Act  shall  be  effected 
by  the  entry  in  the  dentists'  register  of  the  name,  qualification, 
and  residence  of  any  person  entitled  or  claiming  to  be  regis- 
tered thereunder. 


378  APPENDIX. 

YI<  TOE!  \. 

An  Act  to  Provide  for  the  Registration  of  Dentists  Qualified  to 
Practice  in  Victoria. 

WTiereas,  it  is  expedient  that  provision  be  made  for  the 

registration  of  persons  qualified  to  practice  as  dentists  with- 
in the  colony  of  Victoria  : 

Be  it,  therefore,  enacted  by  the  Queen's  Most  Excellent  Maj- 
esty, by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Legislative 
Council  and  the  Legislative  Assembly  in  this  present  Parlia- 
ment assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follows 
(that  is  to  say) : 

Section  1.  This  Act  may,  for  all  purposes,  be  cited  as 
"The  Dentists'  Act,  1887." 

Sec  2.  In  the  construction  and  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act,  the  following  terms  shall,  if  not  inconsistent  with  the 
context,  have  the  respective  meanings  hereby  assigned  to 
them  (that  is  to  say) : 

"  Dental  Board  "  shall  mean  the  Dental  Board  appointed 
under  the  provision  of  this  Act. 

"  Dentist  "  shall  mean  a  person  registered  under  this  Act. 

"Minister"  shall  mean  the  responsible  Minister  of  the 
Crown  for  the  time  being  administering  this  Act. 

"  Register  "  shall  mean  the  dentists'  register  for  quali- 
fied dentists,  to  be  kept  in  pursuance  of  the  provisions  of  this 
Act. 

"  Registrar"  shall  mean  the  Registrar  appointed  under 
the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

DENTAL    BOARD   AND  OFFICERS. 

Sec.  3.  The  Governor  in  Council  may  appoint  a  board 
consisting  of  eight  members,  under  the  style  of  "  The  Den- 
tal Board  of  Victoria,"  hereinafter  in  this  Act  termed  "  The 
Dental  Board." 

Sec  4.  !No  person  shall  be  appointed  or  elected  President 
or  member  of  the  Dental  Board  for  more  than  three  years, 
but  any  person  appointed  or  elected  a  member  of  the  Dental 
Board  shall,  upon  the  expiration  of  the  term  for  which  he 


DENTAL     JCRISPRCDEXCE.  6t\) 

was  so  appointed  or  elected,  be  eligible  for  re-appointment 
or  re-election.  The  Governor  in  Council  may  from  time  to 
time  remove  the  President  or  any  member  of  the  Dental 
Board. 

Sec.  5.  A  quorum  of  the  Dental  Board  shall  consist  of 
not  less  than  three  members  thereof.  In  the  absence  of  the 
President  from  any  meeting  of  the  said  Board,  one  of  the 
members  present  shall  be  elected  Chairman  of  that  meeting. 

Sec.  6.  The  first  members  of  the  Dental  Board,  includ- 
ing the  President,  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Governor  in 
Council,  without  previous  election,  for  a  period  of  three  years ; 
provided,  that  at  least  four  of  the  person-  so  appointed  shall 
be  persons  who  appear  to  be  eligible  for  registration  as  den- 
tists under  this  Act,  and  three  shall  be  legally  qualified  med- 
ical practitioners,  registered  under  the  "  Medical  Practitioners' 
Statute,  1865."  If  any  vacancy  occurs  in  the  office  of  member 
of  the  Dental  Board  during  the  period  for  which  the  first 
members  of  the  said  board  are  appointed,  the  Governor  in 
Council  may  fill  such  vacancy  by  appointing,  without  pre- 
vious election,  any  dentist ;  and  the  person  so  appointed  shall 
hold  office  until  the  expiration  of  three  years  from  the  date 
of  the  appointment  of  the  first  members,  and  no  longer. 

Sec.  7.  On  the  expiration  of  the  period  for  which  such 
first  members  are  appointed  to  hold  office,  no  person  shall  be 
eligible  to  be  appointed  a  member  of  the  Dental  Board,  un- 
less he  has  been  elected  to  act  as  a  member  of  the  said  board 
"by  the  dentists;  and  no  person  shall  be  appointed  President, 
unless  he  be  a  member  of  said  board,  and  has  been  elected  by 
the  other  members  thereof  to  act  as  President.  At  least  four 
members  of  the  said  board  shall  be  dentists,  and  three  shall 
be  legally  qualified  medical  practitioners,  registered  under 
the  uMedical  Practitioners'  Statute,  1865."  Every  election  of 
a  person  to  act  as  a  member  of  the  said  board  shall  be  held  in 
the  manner  prescibed  by  regulations  to  be  made  by  the  said 
board,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  Governor  in  Council. 

Sec.  8.  The  persons  appointed  by  the  Governor  in 
Council  shall  conduct  examinations  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act  in  such  manner,  and  shall  grant  certificates  in  such  form, 


380  APPENDIX. 

as  the  Governor  in  Council,  from  time  to  time,  by  regulation 
directs. 

Sec.  9.  The  Dental  Board  may  from  time  to  time  appoint 
a  Registrar  and  any  officers  they  may  think  tit  for  the  pur- 
poses of  this  Act,  and  may,  at  any  time,  remove  any  person 
so  appointed  ;  and  may,  from  time  to  time,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  Governor  in  Council,  make,  alter  and  repeal 
by-laws  regulating  their  proceedings  and  sittings  and  the 
election  of  a  Chairman  and,  generally,  as  to  the  conduct  of 
their  business. 

REGISTER. 

Sec  10.  A  register  shall  be  kept  by  the  Registrar  to  be 
called  the  "  Dentists'  Register,"  and  the  said  register  shall 
contain  in  one  alphabetical  list,  according  to  surnames,  the 
names  of  all  dentists  who  are  registered  under  this  Act,  and 
shall  state  the  full  names  and  addresses  of  the  registered  per- 
sons, the  description  and  date  of  the  qualifications  in  respect 
of  which  they  are  registered,  and,  subject  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Act,  shall  contain  such  particulars  and  be  in  such  form 
as  the  Governor  in  Council  from  time  to  time  directs,  and 
the  said  register  shall  be  open  to  inspection  by  the  public  on 
payment  of  the  fees  prescribed  in  the  First  Schedule  hereto. 

Sec.  11.  The  Registrar  shall  from  time  to  time  insert  in 
the  register  any  alteration  which  comes  to  his  knowledge  in 
the  name  or  address  of  any  person  registered  therein,  and  he 
shall  erase  from  the  register  the  name  of  every  deceased  per- 
son ;  and  in  the  execution  of  these  duties  the  Registrar  shall 
act  in  each  case  on  such  evidence  as  appears  sufficient. 

Sec  12.  Any  entry  in  the  register  which  appears  to  the 
Registrar  to  have  been  irregularly  or  fraudulently  made  may 
be  by  him  erased  if  the  Minister  so  direct.  If  any  person 
registered  under  this  Act  has,  either  before  or  after  the  pass- 
ing thereof,  and  either  before  or  after  he  is  so  registered,  been 
convicted  either  in  Her  Majesty's  dominions  or  elsewhere,  of 
an  offense  which,  if  committed  in  Victoria,  would  be  a  felony 
or  a  misdemeanor,  such  person  shall  be  liable  to  have  his 
name  erased  from  the  register. 

The  Dental  Board  may  cause  inquiry  to  be  made  into- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  381 

the  case  of  a  person  alleged  to  be  liable  to  have  his  name 
erased  under  this  section,  and,  on  proof  of  such  conviction, 
shall  make  representation  of  the  same  to  the  Governor  in 
Council,  who  may  thereupon  direct  the  Registrar  to  erase 
the  name  of  such  person  from  the  register ;  provided,  that 
the  name  of  a  person  shall  not  be  erased  under  this  section 
on  account  of  a  conviction  for  a  political  offense  out  of  Her 
Majesty's  dominions. 

Sec.  13.  Any  person  who  willfully  makes,  or  causes  to  be 
made,  any  falsification  in  any  matter  relating  to  the  register, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall,  on  con- 
viction thereof,  be  liable  to  be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not 
exceeding  twelve  months. 

Sec  14.  A  true  copy  of  the  register  aforesaid,  certified 
by  the  Registrar  to  be  a  true  copy,  shall,  in  the  month  of 
January  in  each  and  every  year,  be  sent  to  the  Minister,  and 
shall  by  him  be  published  in  the  Government  Gazette,  and 
shall  be  published  and  sold  by  the  Dental  Board,  and  any 
printed  documents  purporting  to  be  a  copy  of  such  register 
shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  in  all  courts  of  law  in  all  legal 
proceedings  whatsoever,  and  before  all  justices  and  others, 
that  the  persons  therein  specified  are  registered  according  to 
the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  the  absence  of  the  name  of 
any  person  from  the  latest  of  such  printed  copies  for  the  time 
being,  shall  he  prima  fade  evidence  (until  the  contrary  be  made 
to  appear)  that  such  person  is  not  so  registered  ;  provided, 
that,  in  the  case  of  any  person  whose  name  does  not  appear 
in  such  copy,  a  certificate  under  the  hand  of  the  Registrar 
to  the  effect  that  such  person  is  registered  under  this  Act, 
shall  be  evidence  that  such  person  is  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  15.  On  application  made  to  him  at  any  time  for 
that  purpose,  the  Registrar  shall,  if  so  directed  by  the  Dental 
Board,  issue  to  any  applicant  a  certificate  to  the  effect  that 
he  is  registered  under  this  Act. 

registration. 
Sec  16.  From  and  after  the  first  day   of  March,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-eight,  no  person  other 


382  APPENDIX. 

than  a  legally  qualified  medical  practitioner,  shall  be  entitled 
to  take  or  use  the  name  or  title  of  "  dentist,"  or  of  "  dental 
practitioner,"  or  of  "  dental  surgeon,"  or  any  name,  title, 
addition  or  description,  implying  that  he  is  registered  under 
this  Act,  or  that  he  is  a  person  specially  qualified  to  practice 
dentistry  (either  alone  or  in  combination  with  any  other  word 
or  words),  unless  he  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Any  person  who,  after  the  first  day  of  March,  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  eighty-eight,  not  being  a  person 
registered  under  this  Act  or  a  legally  qualified  medical  prac- 
titioner, takes  or  uses  any  such  name,  title,  addition  or  de- 
scription as  aforesaid,  shall  be  liable,  on  conviction,  to  a  pen- 
alty not.  exceeding  twenty  pounds. 

Sec.  17.  Every  person  registered  under  this  Act,  and 
every  legally  qualified  medical  practitioner,  shall  be  entitled 
to  practice  dental  surgery  and  dentistry  in  any  part  of  Vic- 
toria, and  to  sue  in  any  court  of  law  within  Victoria,  to  the 
extent  of  the  jurisdiction  of  such  court,  for  the  recovery  of 
his  fees,  or  other  renumeration  for  his  professional  services  in 
dentistry,  or  in  the  performance  of  any  dental  operation,  or 
for  any  dental  attendance  or  advice  ;  and  it  shall  be  sufficient 
to  state  in  the  particulars  of  demand  the  words  "  for  dental 
services,"  which  shall  include  every  demand  for  any  dental 
operation,  attendance,  and  advice,  and  for  any  articles  supplied 
by  the  plaintiff  to  the  defendant  for  dental  purposes.  From 
and  after  the  first  day  of  March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  eighty-eight,  no  person  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  any  fee 
or  charge  in  any  court  of  law  for  the  performance  of  any 
dental  operation,  or  for  any  dental  attendance  or  advice,  or 
shall  hold  any  appointment  as  a  dentist  or  dental  practitioner 
or  dental  surgeon  in  any  hospital,  infirmary,  dispensarj^,  or 
lying-in  hospital,  or  in  any  lunatic  asylum,  gaol,  penitentiary 
or  other  public  institution,  unless  he  is  registered  under  this 
Act,  or  is  a  legally  qualified  medical  practitioner. 

Sec.  18.  Any  person  who  : 

(a.)  Is  registered,  or  is  entitled  to  be  registered,  in  the 
United  Kingdom  in  accordance  with  the  law  for  the  time 
being  in  force  therein,  as  a  dentist  or  medical  practitioner  ; 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  383 

(b.)  Is  entitled,  as  hereinafter  mentioned,  to  be  registered 
under  this  Act  as  a  dentist ; 

(c.)  Is  at  the  passing  of  this  Act  bona  Jide  engaged  in  any 
part  of  Victoria  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  sur- 
gery, either  separately  or  in  conjunction  with  the  practice  of 
medicine,  surgery  or  pharmacy  ; 

(d.)  Has  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  and  has 
been  engaged  continuously  during  a  period  of  not  less  than 
four  years  in  the  acquirement  of  professional  knowledge, 
and  has  passed  an  examination  before  the  board  in  the 
subjects  prescribed  b}'  them,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the 
Governor  in  Council,  shall  be  entitled  to  be  registered  under 
this  Act. 

Sec.  19.  Any  dental  student  who  has  been  studying  with, 
and  any  apprentice  of  any  person  entitled  to  be  registered  un- 
der this  Act,  who  has  commenced  his  professional  education 
or  apprenticeship  at  least  six  months  before  the  passing  of 
this  Act,  and  has  served  as  a  pupil  or  apprentice  for  not  less 
than  three  years,  shall  be  entitled,  on  making  a  declaration 
in  the  form  in  the  Third  Schedule  hereto  to  be  registered 
under  this  Act,  as  though  he  had  been,  at  the  passing  of  this 
Act,  bona  Jide  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery  in  Victory. 

Sec  20.  Any  person,  who  either  is  not  domiciled  in 
Victoria,  or  has  practiced  dental  surgery  or  dentistry  for 
more  than  ten  years  elsewhere  than  in  Victoria,  showing  that 
he  holds  some  recognized  certificate,  as  hereinafter  defined, 
granted  in  some  portion  of  the  British  possessions  other  than 
the  United  Kingdom,  and  that  he  is  of  good  character,  shall, 
upon  the  payment  of  the  registation  fees,  be  entitled,  with- 
out examination,  to  be  registered  as  a  dentist  under  this  Act. 

Sec  21.  Any  person  who  is  not  a  British  subject,  or 
who  either  is  not  domiciled  in  Victoria,  or  has  practiced 
dental  surgery  or  dentistry  more  than  ten  years  elsewhere 
than  in  Victoria,  showing  that  he  holds  some  recognized 
certificate,  as  hereinafter  defined,  granted  in  a  foreign  coun- 
try, and  that  he  is  of  good  character,  and  either  continues  to 
hold  such  certificate,  or  has  not  been  deprived  thereof  for  any 


384  APPENDIX. 

cause  which  disqualifies  him  from  being  registered  under 
this  Act,  shall,  upon  payment  of  the  registration  fees,  be  en- 
titled, without  examination,  to  be  registered  as  a  dentist  un- 
der this  Act. 

Sec.  22.  The  certificate  granted  in  a  British  possession, 
or  in  a  foreign  country,  which  is  to  be  deemed  such  a  rec- 
ognized certificate  as  is  required  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act,  shall  be  such  certificate,  diploma,  membership,  degree, 
license,  letters,  testimonial,  or  other  title,  status  or  document, 
as  may  be  recognized  by  the  Dental  Board,  as  entitling  the 
holder  thereof  to  practice  dental  surgery  or  dentistry  in  such 
possession  or  country,  and  as  furnishing  sufficient  guarantee 
of  the  possession  of  the  requisite  knowledge  and  skill  for 
the  efficient  practice  of  dental  surgery  or  dentistry. 

Sec.  23.  If  any  person  is  refused  registration  under  this 
Act  as  a  dentist,  the  Dental  Board  shall,  if  required  by  him, 
state  in  writing  the  reason  for  such  refusal ;  and,  if  such  reason 
be  that  the  certificate  held  or  obtained  by  him  is  not  such  a 
recognized  certificate  as  above  defined,  such  person  may  ap- 
peal to  the  Governor  in  Council,  and  the  Governor  in  Coun- 
cil may,  after  hearing  the  said  board,  dismiss  the  appeal  or 
order  the  said  board  to  recognize  such  certificate,  and  such 
order  shall  be  duly  obeyed. 

Sec.  24.  The  Dental  Board  may,  from  time  to  time,  sub- 
ject to  the  approval  of  the  Governor  in  Council,  make,  alter 
and  repeal  regulations  specifying  what  certificates,  diplomas, 
memberships,  degrees,  licenses,  letters,  testimonials,  or  other 
titles,  status  or  documents  granted  in  a  British  possession, 
other  than  the  United  Kingdom,  or  granted  in  a  foreign 
country,  will  be  recognized  by  the  said  board  as  qualifying 
persons  holding  them,  or  any  of  them,  to  be  registered  under 
this  Act  as  dentists. 

The  Dental  Board  may,  when  any  person  makes  appli- 
cation to  be  registered  in  respect  of  any  certificate,  diploma, 
membership,  degree,  license,  letters,  testimonial,  or  other 
title,  status  or  document,  not  specified  in  such  regulations, 
entertain  such  application  and  deal  with  it  specially,  and 
may,  if  they  think  fit,  give  to  such  applicant  a  certificate  of 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  385 

recognition  setting  forth  that  he  is  the  holder  of  a  recognized 
certificate,  and  the  Registrar  shall  take  such  certificate  of 
recognition  as  an  authority  to  register  such  applicant. 

Sec.  25.  "When  a  person  entitled  to  be  registered  under 
this  Act  produces  or  sends  to  the  Registrar  the  certificate, 
diploma,  license,  letters,  testimonial,  or  other  document  or 
writing  conferring  or  evidencing  his  qualification,  with  a 
statement  of  his  name  and  address,  and  all  other  particulars 
{if  any),  required  for  registration  under  this  Act,  and  pays 
the  registration  fees,  he  shall  be  registered,  and  such  regis- 
tration shall  consist  in  the  entry  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  Reg- 
istrar in  the  register  of  such  name,  address,  and  other  par- 
ticulars ;  provided,  that  a  person  shall  not  be  registered  un- 
der this  Act  as  having  been  before  the  passing  thereof 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dental  surgery  or  dentistry  in 
Victoria,  unless  he  produces  or  transmits  to  the  Registrar, 
before  the  first  day  of  March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  eighty-eight,  information  of  his  name  and  address,  and 
a  declaration  signed  by  him  in  the  form  set  out  in  the  Fourth 
Schedule  to  this  Act. 

A  person  resident  in  Victoria  shall  not  be  disqualified  for 
being  registered  by  reason  only  that  he  is  not  a  British  subject. 

EXAMINATION. 

Sec.  26.  The  Dental  Board  shall,  at  such  times  as  are 
prescribed  by  the  Governor  in  Council,  hold  examinations 
for  the  purpose  of  testing  the  fitness  of  persons  to  practice 
dental  surgery  or  dentistry,  and  may  grant  certificates  of 
such  fitness  to  those  who  have  satisfied  the  said  board  thereof 
on  examination. 

The  Dental  Board  shall  admit  to  the  examinations  held 
by  them  under  this  section,  any  person  desirous  of  being  ex- 
amined who  has  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  and 
has  complied  with  the  regulations  in  force  (if  any)  made  by 
the  said  board  as  to  the  education  of  such  persons. 

Sec.  27.  Such  reasonable  fees  shall  be  paid  for  the  cer- 
tificate to  be  granted  under  this  Act  by  the  Dental  Board, 
and  for  examination  by  the  said  board,  as  the  Governor  in 
Council,  from  time  to  time,  by  regulation  directs. 


380  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  28.  If  it  appears  to  the  Governor  in  Council  that 
an  attempt  lias  been  made  by  the  Dental  Board  to  impose 
on  any  candidate,  offering  himself  for  examination,  an  obliga- 
tion to  adopt  or  refrain  from  adopting  the  practice  of  any 
particular  theory  of  dental  surgery  or  dentistry,  as  a  test  or 
condition  of  admitting:  him  to  examination  or  granting  a 
certificate  of  fitness  under  this  Act,  the  Governor  in  Council 
may  thereupon  issue  an  injunction  to  the  said  board  directing 
them  to  desist  from  such  practice. 

MISCELLANEOUS. 

Sec.  29.  Any  person  who  willfully  procures,  or  attempts 
to  procure,  himself  or  any  other  person  to  be  registered  under 
this  Act,  by  making  or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or 
produced,  any  false  or  fraudulent  representation  or  declara- 
tion, either  verbally  or  in  writing,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor,  and  shall,  on  conviction  thereof,  be  liable  to 
be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not  exceeding  twelve  months. 

Sec  30.  The  Dental  Board  may  question  any  person 
who  attends  before  it,  and  any  witness  who  may  be  produced 
before  the  said  board,  and  may  examine  any  person  upon 
oath,  or  take  a  solemn  declaration  from  such  person ;  and,  if 
any  person  willfully,  knowingly  or  corruptly  make  any  false 
statement  upon  such  examination,  or  in  such  declaration,  or 
utter  or  attempt  to  utter,  or  put  off  as  true,  before  the  said 
board  any  false,  forged  or  counterfeit  certificate,  diploma, 
license,  letter,  testimonial,  or  other  document  or  writing,  he 
shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  being  thereof  duly 
convicted,  he  shall  be  liable  to  be  imprisoned  for  any  period 
not  exceeding  one  year. 

All  offenses  under  this  Act  shall  be  heard  and  deter- 
mined, and  all  penalties  imposed  by  this  Act  shall  be  recov- 
ered, in  a  summary  manner  before  two  Justices  of  the  Peace 
in  Petty  Sessions,  and  all  penalties  when  recovered  shall  be 
paid  to  the  Dental  Board,  to  be  applied  toward  the  expenses 
of  carrying  this  Act  into  effect. 

Sec  31.  Subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  Gov- 
ernor in  Council  ma}',  from  time  to  time,  fix  the  times  at 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  38T 

which  examinations  are  to  be  held  under  this  Act,  and  may- 
make,  alter  and  revoke  such  orders  and  regulations  as  he 
thinks  fit  with  respect  to  the  examination  of  persons  desiring 
to  obtain  certificates  of  fitness  to  practice  dental  surgery  or 
dentistry ;  the  granting  of  certificates  of  recognition  and  of 
fitness  by  the  Dental  Board  ;  the  keeping  of  the  register ; 
registration  therein,  and  the  payment  of  fees  in  respect  of 
certificates  granted  by  the  said  board  under  this  Act,  and  in 
respect  of  examinations  held  by  the  said  board,  and  generally 
for  carrying  this  Act  into  effect. 

Sec.  32.  The  fees  mentioned  in  the  First  Schedule  to 
this  Act  shall  be  payable  by  persons  applying  to  be  registered 
or  obtaining  certificates  of  registration  under  this  Act,  or  in- 
specting the  register,  respectively,  by  the  Registrar,  and  shall 
be  applied  by  the  Dental  Board  in  such  manner  as  they  think 
fit  in  defraying  the  expenses  of  carrying  out  the  provisions 
of  this  Act. 

Sec.  33.  All  persons  registered  under  this  Act  shall  be 
exempt  from  serving  on  juries  and  inquests,  and  from  serving 
in  the  militia. 

Tasmania  has  a  Dentists'  Act,  similar  to  that  of  Victoria. 

The  colony  of  New  South  "Wales  has  no  dental  law. 


DOMINION  OF  CANADA. 

NORTHWEST  TERRITORIES. 

An  Ordinance  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the 
Northwest  Territories. 

The  Lieutenant-  Governor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of  the  Legislative  Assembly,  enacts,  as  follows  : 

Section  1.  That  no  person  shall  practice  the  profession 
of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  Northwest  Territories 
without  having  first  received  a  certificate,  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided, entitling  him  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery. 

Sec.  2.  That  such  certificate  shall  be  issued  by  the  Clerk 
of  the  Legislative  Assembly,  upon  production  to  him  of  a. 
diploma  of  graduation  in  dental  surgery  from  the  faculty 


388  APPENDIX. 

of  any  Canadian  dental  college,  or  the  faculty  of  any  Cana- 
dian university  having  a  special  dental  department,  or  from 
any  such  institution,  duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of  Great 
Britian,  or  any  of  her  dependencies;  or  a  license  to  practice 
dental  surgery  issued  by  any  of  the  Provinces  of  the  Domin- 
ion of  Canada;  or  a  diploma  or  license  from  a  foreign  dental 
institution  which  required,  at  the  time  of  issue  of  such 
diploma  or  license,  attendance  at  a  regular  course  of  lectures, 
and  an  apprenticeship  of  not  less  than  two  and  one-half  years ; 
or  who  has  been  in  regular  practice  in  the  Northwest  Terri- 
tories as  a  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  for  a  period  of  one  month 
immediately  preceding  the  passing  of  this  ordinance,  and  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  persons  claiming  to  be  entitled  to 
the  certificate  required  by  this  section,  to  produce  to  the  said 
clerk  evidence,  satisfactory  to  him,  of  his  being  entitled 
thereto. 

Provided  always,  that  nothing  herein  contained  shall  be 
construed  to  require  physicians,  surgeons,  or  others  to  take 
out  such  certificates  for  the  purpose  of  qualifying  them  to 
extract  teeth. 

Sec.  3.  That,  before  any  such  certificate  is  granted,  the 
applicant  shall  pay  to  the  general  revenue  fund  of  the  Terri- 
tories the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars,  unless  he  is  a  person 
who,  at  present  and  for  one  month  immediately  preceding 
the  passing  hereof,  has  been  in  actual  practice  of  dentistry 
and  dental  surgery  in  the  Northwest  Territories,  and  in  such 
case  he  shall  pay  into  said  fund  the  sum  of  five  dollars. 

Sec.  4.  After  the  period  of  six  months  from  the  passing 
of  this  ordinance,  any  person  not  holding  a  valid  certificate 
issued  by  the  said  clerk,  as  aforesaid,  who  practices  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery,  except  extracting  teeth,  shall  be  guilty  of 
an  infraction  of  this  ordinance;  and,  upon  conviction  by  any 
Justice  of  the  Peace  within  the  Territories  in  a  summary 
manner,  pay  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty  dollars,  nor  more 
than  one  hundred  dollars,  in  the  discretion  of  said  Justice, 
and  costs. 

Sec.  5.  That  no  person  who  has  not  received  the  certificate 
required  by  this  ordinance,  shall  recover  in  any  court  of  law 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  389 

any  fees  or  money  for  any  materials  provided  by  him  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry,  or  dental  surgery,  excepting  for  extract- 
ing teeth. 


BRITISH  COLUMBIA. 


An  Act  to  Regulate  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  in  the  Province  of 
British  Columbia. 

Whereas,  the  profession  of  dentistry  is  extensively  prac- 
ticed in  Europe,  the  United  States  and  the  Dominion  of  Can- 
ada ;  and  whereas  the  said  profession  of  dentistry  is  protected 
by  law  in  Europe,  the  greater  portion  of  the  United  States, 
and  in  parts  of  Canada ;  and  whereas,  it  is  expedient  for  the 
protection  of  the  public,  that  there  should,  by  enactment,  be 
established  a  certain  standard  of  qualification  required  of 
each  practitioner  of  the  said  profession  or  calling,  and  that 
certain  privileges  and  protection  should  be  afforded  to  such 
practitioners ; 

Therefore,  Her  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the  Province  of  British  Colum- 
bia, enacts,  as  follows: 

Section  1.  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to 
practice,  or  attempt  to  practice,  the  profession  of  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  in  the  Province  of  British  Columbia,  without 
having  first  received  a  diploma  from  the  faculty  of  some 
reputable  dental  college,  school  or  university  department  duly 
authorized  by  the  laws  of  Great  Britain  and  its  dependencies, 
or  the  laws  of  some  foreign  government,  and  in  which  col- 
lege, school  or  university  department  there  was,  at  the  time 
of  issuance  of  such  diploma,  annually  delivered  a  full  course 
of  lectures  and  instructions  in  dentistry  or  dental  surgery, 
and  without  having  had  issued  to  him  a  certificate  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act ;  provided,  that  nothing  in  section  1 
of  this  Act  shall  apply  to  persons  who  have  been  three 
months  in  actual  practice  in  this  Province,  previous  to  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  except  as  hereinafter  provided,  and  noth- 
ing in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  physicians, 
surgeons  or  others  from  extracting  teeth. 


390  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Examiners  consisting  of  three  prac- 
ticing dentists,  residents  of  this  Province,  is  hereby  created, 
who  shall  issue  certificates  to  persons  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry or  dental  surgery  in  this  Province,  who  have  been  three 
months  in  actual  practice  in  said  Province  previous  to  the 
passage  of  this  Act ;  and  also  to  decide  upon  the  validity  and 
sufficiency  of  character  of  such  diplomas  as  may  be  subse- 
quently presented  for  registration  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Sec.  3.  The  members  of  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall 
be  appointed  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor  in  Council,  upon  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  and  shall  serve  for  a  term  of  three  years, 
excepting  that  the  members  of  the  board  first  appointed  shall 
hold  their  offices  as  follows :  One  for  three  years;  one  for  two 
years;  one  for  one  year,  respectively,  and  until  their  suc- 
cessors are  duly  appointed. 

In  case  of  any  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such  va- 
cancy shall  be  filled  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor  in  Council, 
from  those  in  actual  practice  in  the  said  Province. 

Sec  4.  The  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  keep  a  record 
in  which  shall  be  registered  the  names,  residences,  or  places 
of  business  of  all  persons  authorized  under  this  Act  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  in  this  Province.  The  said  board  shall  elect 
from  its  members  a  President  and  a  Secretary,  and  shall  meet 
at  least  once  a  year,  and  whenever  applications  for  certificates 
shall  be  made.  A  majority  of  the  members  of  said  board 
shall  constitute  a  quorum. 

Sec  5.  Every  person  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
within  this  Province  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act, 
shall,  within  three  months  thereafter,  cause  his  name  and 
residence  and  place  of  business  to  be  registered  with  the  said 
Board  of  Examiners,  upon  which  said  board  shall  issue  to 
such  person  a  certificate  duly  signed  by  a  majority  of  the 
members  of  said  board,  and  which  shall  entitle  the  person  to 
whom  it  is  issued  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  set  forth  in 
this  Act. 

Sec  6.  To  provide  for  the  proper  enforcement  of  this 
Act,  the  said  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  entitled  to  the 
following  fees,  to  wit :  For  each  certificate  issued  to  persons 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  391 

■engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  Province  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  the  sum  of  ten  dollars ;  for 
each  certificate  issued  to  persons  not  engaged  in  the  practice 
of  dentistry  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  the  sum 
of  twenty -five  dollars. 

Sec.  7.  There  shall  be  allowed  and  paid  to  each  of  the 
members  of  the  said  Board  of  Examiners  such  fees  for  attend- 
ance, in  no  case  to  exceed  ten  dollars  per  day,  and  such  rea- 
sonable traveling  expenses,  as  the  said  board  shall  allow  from 
time  to  time.  Said  expenses  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  fees  and 
penalties  received  by  the  said  board  under  the  provisions  of 
this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  All  moneys  in  excess  of  necessary  expenses  shall 
be  held  by  the  Secretary  of  said  board  as  a  special  fund  for 
meeting  the  expenses  of  said  board,  he  giving  such  bonds  as 
the  board  may,  from  time  to  time,  direct. 

Sec.  9.  The  said  board,  at  its  first  meeting,  and  from 
time  to  time  thereafter,  shall  make  such  rules,  regulations, 
and  by-laws,  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
as  may  be  necessary  for  the  proper  and  better  guidance  of 
the  said  board,  which  rules,  regulations,  and  by-laws  shall 
first  be  published  for  one  month  in  the  British  Columbia 
Oazette,  and  in  one  or  more  newspapers  circulating  in  the 
Province.  Any  or  all  of  such  rules,  regulations  and  by-laws 
shall  be  liable  to  be  cancelled  and  annulled  by  an  order  of 
the  Lieutenant-Governor  in  Council. 

Sec  10.  The  Secretary  of  said  board  shall,  on  or  before 
the  fifteenth  day  of  January,  in  each  and  every  year,  inclose 
to  the  Provincial  Secretary  an  annual  report  of  its  proceed- 
ings, together  with  an  account  of  all  moneys  received  and 
disbursed  by  said  Board  of  Examiners ;  also  a  list  of  the 
names  of  all  persons  to  whom  certificates  have  been  granted 
and  the  qualifications  therefor,  and  such  lists  shall  be  pub- 
lished in  the  Gazette. 

Sec.  11.  If  any  person,  after  the  period  of  three  months 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  not  holding  a  valid  certificate, 
practices  the  said  profession  or  calling  of  dentistry  or  dental 
eurgery,or  willfully  and  falsely  pretends  to  hold  a  certificate 


302  APPENDIX. 

under  this  Act  ;  or  takes  or  uses  any  name,  addition,  or  de- 
scription implying  that  he  is  duly  authorized  to  practice  the 
profession  or  calling  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  he  shall, 
upon  a  summary  conviction  thereof  before  any  Justice  of  the 
Peace,  for  any  and  every  such  offense,  pay  a  penalty  not  ex- 
ceeding one  hundred  dollars,  nor  less  than  twenty-five  dollars, 
and  the  half  of  any  such  penalty  shall  he  paid  to  the  Board 
of  Examiners;  and  it  is  further  provided  that  no  person  who 
is  not  qualified  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  recover 
in  any  court  of  law  for  any  work  done  or  any  materials  used 
by  him  in  the  ordinary  work  of  a  dentist. 

Sec.  12.  Any  British  subject  being  a  resident  of  this 
Province  (not  entitled  to  the  privileges  and  benefits  of  this 
Act  under  section  1),  desirous  of  entering  the  profession  or 
calling  of  dentistry,  shall  be  apprenticed  to  a  practitioner, 
duly  qualified  under  this  Act,  for  a  period  of  three  years,, 
and  shall  file  his  articles  of  apprenticeship  with  the  Secretary 
within  one  calendar  month  after  the  said  articles  have  been 
executed. 

Sec.  13.  Any  such  person  having  been  so  apprenticed  as 
aforesaid  shall,  at  the  completion  of  the  term  of  his  appren- 
ticeship, and  upon  the  production  to  the  Secretary  of  satis- 
factory evidence  of  his  having  served  his  said  apprenticeshipr 
and  of  his  good  moral  character,  be  entitled  to  be  examined 
as  to  his  fitness  to  practice  the  profession  or  calling  of  den- 
tistry before  the  Board  of  Examiners  appointed  under  this 
Act,  and  shall,  upon  passing  such  examination  to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  said  board,  receive  a  certificate,  upon  the  pay- 
ment of  a  fee  of  ten  dollars,  which  shall  entitle  him  to  all 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  this  Act. 

Passed  April  6th,  1886. 


MANITOBA. 


An  Act  to  Incorporate  the  Manitoba  Dental  Association. 

"Whereas,  the  profession  of  dentistry  is  extensively  prac- 
ticed in  the  Province  of  Manitoba,  and  it  is  expedient  for  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  393 

protection  of  the  public  that  a  certain  standard  of  qualifica- 
tion should  be  required  by  each  practitioner  of  said  pro- 
fession, and  that  certain  privileges  and  protection  should  be 
afforded  to  such  practitioners ; 

lherefore,Her  Majesty,  by  and  uith  the  advice  and  consent 
of  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the  Province  of  Manitoba,  enacts, 
as  follows  : 

Section  1.  The  following  persons,  that  is  to  say :  James 
Lee  Benson,  Samuel  Fowell  Buxton  Reid,  Robert  Ardea 
Harvie,  John  C.  Bowers,  H.  D.  Burritt,  George  F.  Bush, 
Major  C.  Clark,  Robert  R.  Dalgleish,  Archie  Doherty, 
Edward  William  Emmons,  T.  J.  Jones,  James  A.  McCaus- 
land,  Daniel  McPhee,  A.  G.  McLean,  R.  W.  Stark,  Jule 
"Witharn  Norton,  Robert  Hutcheson  Robertson,  J.  B.  Vos- 
burgh,  J.  Johnson  White,  Nicholas  Franklin  White,  and 
every  other  person  who  holds  a  valid  and  unforfeited  certifi- 
cate of  license  to  practice  dentistry  which  has  been  granted 
to  him  by  any  Board  of  Directors,  duly  elected  under  this 
Act,  shall-  form  the  Dental  Association  of  the  Province  of 
Manitoba. 

Sec.  2.  The  said  Association  is  hereby  incorporated  under 
the  name  and  style  of  "  The  Manitoba  Dental  Association," 
and  the  said  Association  shall  be  deemed  to  be  a  body  cor- 
porate and  politic,  and  by  the  same  name  shall  have  per- 
petual succession  and  a  common  seal,  with  power  to  break, 
alter,  change  or  make  new  the  same,  and  by  the  name  afore- 
said may  sue  and  be  sued,  implead  and  be  impleaded,  answer 
and  be  answered  unto  in  all  courts  and  places  whatsoever, 
and  may  have,  hold,  receive,  enjoy,  possess  and  retain  for 
the  purposes  of  said  corporation,  all  such  sums  of  money  as 
may  at  any  time  be  given  or  bequeathed  to  and  for  the  use 
of  the  same,  and  by  the  said  name  purchase,  take,  hold  and 
enjoy  any  real  estate  or  any  estate  or  interest,  derived  or 
arriving  out  of  real  estate  for  the  purpose  aforesaid,  and  for 
no  other  purpose,  and  may  sell,  grant,  lease  or  otherwise  dis- 
pose of  the  same,  but  the  real  estate  so  held  by  the  said  cor- 
poration shall  at  no  time  exceed  in  annual  value  the  sum  of 
five  thousand  dollars. 


394  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  3.  The  Board  of  Directors  of  said  Association  shall 
consist  of  five  members,  who  shall  hold  office  for  three  years; 
any  member  may  at  any  time  resign  by  letter  directed  to  the 
Secretary,  and,  in  the  event  of  any  such  resignation,  or  a 
vacancy  occurring  by  death  or  otherwise,  the  remaining 
members  of  the  board  shall  elect  some  fit  and  proper  person 
from  among  the  licentiates,  being  members  of  this  Associa- 
tion, to  supply  such  vacancy. 

Sec.  4.  The  first  Board  of  Directors  shall  be  composed 
of  the  following  persons :  Jas.  L.  Benson,  Samuel  F.  B.  Reid 
and  Robert  A.  Harvey,  dentists,  of  the  city  of  Winnipeg; 
H.  D.  Burritt,  of  the  town  of  Emerson ;  'and  J.  Johnson 
"White,  of  the  town  of  Portage  la  Prairie,  and  their  terms  of 
office  shall  continue  for  three  years  from  the  passing  of  this 
Act. 

Sec.  5.  Every  subsequent  election  of  directors  shall  be  held 
in  the  city  of  Winnipeg  on  the  second  Tuesday  of  January 
in  every  third  year,  and  one  month's  notice  by  circular  of 
such  intended  election  shall  be  given  by  the  Secretary  to  each 
member  of  the  Association. 

Sec.  6.  The  persons  qualified  to  vote  at  the  said  election 
shall  be  those  licentiates  who  have  obtained  certificates  of 
license  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  7.  The  election  of  Directors  shall  be  by  ballot,  and 
the  licentiates  receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes  shall  be 
the  directors  for  the  then  ensuing  term. 

Sec.  8.  The  Secretary  of  the  Association  shall  publish  in 
the  Manitoba  Gazette  the  names  of  those  persons  who  have 
been  elected  members  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  such  publi- 
cation to  be  in  two  successive  issues  of  said  Gazette  next 
after  the  said  election  shall  be  held. 

Sec.  9.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  meet  once  a  year  on 
the  second  Tuesday  in  January,  in  the  city  of  Winnipeg,  and 
such  meeting  may  be  continued  by  adjournment  from  day  to 
day  until  the  business  of  the  board  is  finished,  but  no  session 
shall  exceed  one  week. 

Sec.  10.  The  said  board  shall  have  no  power  to  transact 
any  business  of  the  Association,  unless  a  majority  of  the  mem- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  395 

bers  are  present ;  and,  at  their  first  meeting,  the  said  Board  of 
Directors  shall  elect  from  among  themselves  a  President,  a 
Secretary -Treasurer  and  Registrar. 

Sec  11.  All  moneys  forming  part  of  the  funds  of  this 
Association  shall  be  paid  to  the  Secretary-Treasurer,  and 
shall  be  applied  to  carry  on  the  objects  of  this  Act. 

Sec  12.  All  persons  in  the  Province  of  Manitoba  who  are 
and  have  been  in  regular  and  continuous  office  practice  as 
dentists  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  six  months  preceding 
the  passing  of  this  Act,  shall  have  the  right  to  practice  in 
the  Province  of  Manitoba  the  profession  of  dentistry;  pro- 
vided, that  such  others  shall  have  the  same  right,  who  here- 
after obtain  certificates  of  license  under  the  provisions  of 
this  Act. 

Sec  13.  Any  person  who  is  a  member  of  any  college  of 
dentistry  of  any  of  the  Provinces  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada, 
having  authority  by  law  to  grant  certificates  of  license  or 
diplomas  to  practice  dentistry,  or  who  is  a  member  of  any 
association  or  school  of  dentistry  having  the  like  powers, 
and  who  produces  sufficient  evidence  of  such  membership 
and  testimonials  of  good  character  and  conduct,  shall,  upon 
]:>ayment  of  the  required  fees,  be  admitted  as  a  member  of 
this  Association,  and  be  entitled  to  receive  a  certificate  of 
license  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  Province,  under  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act. 

Sec  14.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall,  from  time  to  time, 
make  such  rules,  regulations  and  by-laws  as  may  be  necessary 
for  the  better  guidance,  government  and  regulation  of  the 
said  board,  and  said  profession  of  dentistry,  and  the  carrying 
out  of  this  Act. 

Sec  1 5.  The  said  board  shall  have  power  and  authority  to 
appoint  one  or  more  examiners  for  the  matriculation  or  pre- 
liminary examination  of  all  students  entering  the  profession; 
such  examination  shall  be  passed  prior  to  entering  into  articles 
of  indenture  with  a  licentiate  of  dentistry,  and  the  commence- 
ment of  study  shall  date  from  the  signing  of  said  articles. 

Sec  16.  The  said  board  shall  also  have  the  power  and 


896  APPENDIX. 

authority  to  fix  and  determine  from  time  to  time  a  curriculum 

of  studies  to  be  pursued  by  students,  and  to  fix  and  determine 
the  period  for  which  every  student  shall  be  articled  and  em- 
ployed under  some  duly  licensed  practitioner,  and  the  exami- 
nation necessary  to  be  passed  before  the  board,  and  the  fees 
to  be  paid  into  the  hands  of  the  Secretary-Treasurer  of  said 
board,  before  receiving  a  certificate  of  license  to  practice  the 
profession  of  dentistry. 

Sec.  17.  The  Board  of  Directors  of  said  corporation  shall 
also  have  authority  to  examine  candidates  and  grant  certifi- 
cates of  license  to  practice  dental  surgery  in  this  Province. 

Sec.  18.  The  said  board  shall  hold  one  meeting  in  each  and 
every  year,  in  the  city  of  Winnipeg,  at  such  place  as  may  from 
time  to  time  be  fixed  by  the  board  for  the  purpose  of  exam- 
ining students,  granting  certificates  of  license,  and  doing 
such  other  business  as  may  properly  come  before  them ;  such 
meetings  shall  be  held  on  the  second  Tuesday  of  January  of 
each  year,  and  shall  continue  from  day  to  day  until  the  busi- 
ness before  the  board  is  finished,  but  no  such  meetings  shall 
continue  for  more  than  one  week. 

Sec.  19.  Every  person  being  desirous  of  being  exam- 
ined by  the  said  board  touching  his  qualifications  for  the 
practice  of  the  said  profession  of  dentistry,  shall,  at  least 
one  month  before  the  sitting  of  the  said  board,  pay  into  the 
hands  of  the  Secretary-Treasurer  the  required  fees,  together 
with  satisfactory  evidence  of  his  term  of  apprenticeship 
having  been  fulfilled, and  as  to  integrity  and  good  morals; 
and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  to  hold  a  sitting  for 
the  purpose  hereinbefore  mentioned,  on  the  second  Tuesday 
of  January,  in  each  year  next  ensuing  the  said  payment. 

Sec.  20.  If  the  board  is  satisfied  by  the  said  examina- 
tion that  the  person  is  duly  qualified  to  practice  the  profes- 
sion of  dentistry,  and  is  further  satisfied  that  he  is  a  person 
of  integrity  and  good  moral  character,  it  shall  grant  him  a 
certificate  of  license,  subject  to  the  rules,  regulations  and  by- 
laws promulgated  under  the  authority  of  this  Act,  and  the 
title  of  Licentiate  of  Dental  Surgery,  which  certificate  and 
title  shall  entitle  him  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  of  this 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  397 

Act,  but  no  diploma  or  certificate  of  license  shall  be  granted 
to  any  person  under  the  age  of  twenty-one  years. 

Sec.  21.  Every  certificate  of  license  shall  be  sealed  with 
the  corporate  seal  of  the  Association  and  signed  by  the  Presi- 
dent and  Secretary-Treasurer  and  Registrar  of  said  board, 
and  the  production  of  such  certificate  of  license  shall  be 
prima  facie  evidence  in  all  courts  of  law,  and  in  all  proceed- 
ings of  whatever  kind  of  its  execution  and  contents. 

Sec  22.  The  Secretary -Treasurer  of  the  said  board  shall, 
on  or  before  the  first  day  of  February  in  each  and  every 
year,  enclose  to  the  Provincial  Secretary  a  certified  list  of  the 
names  of  all  persons  to  whom  certificates  of  license  have 
been  granted  during  the  preceding  year. 

Sec  23.  Every  person  whose  name  is  registered  in  this 
Act  is  hereby  granted  the  license  to  practice  dental  surgery  in 
the  Province  of  Manitoba,  and  to  receive  the  title  of  licentiate 
of  dental  surgery  and  the  diploma  incident  thereto,  upon 
payment  of  the  required  fees. 

Sec  24.  In  case  a  charge  is  made  against  any  licentiate 
of  unprofessional  conduct  or  other  misconduct,  provided  for 
by  the  by-laws  to  be  passed  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
the  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  power  to  hear  and  deter- 
mine the  same,  and  for  this  purpose  to  summon  witnesses  be- 
fore them,  and  to  administer  an  oath  or  affirmation  to  such 
witnesses ;  and,  if  any  licentiate  shall  be  found  guilty  of  the 
charge  preferred  against  him,  he  shall  forfeit  his  certificate 
and  title,  and  the  same  shall  be  cancelled ;  such  forfeiture, 
however,  may  be  annulled,  and  the  said  license  and  all  rights 
and  privileges  thereunder  fully  renewed  and  restored  by- 
said  board  in  such  manner  and  upon  such  conditions  and 
terms  as  the  said  board  shall  think  fit ;  provided,  however, 
that  nothing  in  this  Act  contained  shall  empower  the  said 
board  to  deal  with  any  criminal  or  other  offense  provided 
for  by  law. 

Sec  25.  Any  licentiate  who  shall  be  convicted  of  any 
malpractice  shall  forfeit  his  license,  and  the  same  shall  be  can- 
celled ;  but  the  board  shall  have  power  to  restore  the  same 
if  it  shall  think  fit  and  proper,  notice  of  such  restoration  to 


398  APPENDIX. 

be  given  for  two  weeks  in  some  local  paper  to  be  determined 
upon  by  the  board. 

Sec.  26.  It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  person  not  hold- 
ing a  valid  certificate  of  license  under  this  Act  to  practice  the 
profession  of  dentistry  within  the  Province  of  Manitoba  for 
hire,  gain  or  hope  of  reward,  and,  if  any  person,  after  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  not  holding  such  certificate  of  license, 
shall  practice,  or  profess  to  practice,  within  this  Province,  the 
said  profession  of  dentistry,  either  publicly  or  privately  for 
hire,  gain  or  hope  of  reward,  or  voluntarily  and  falsely  pre- 
tend to  be  a  duly  qualified  licentiate  of  dentistry,  or  assumes 
any  title,  addition  or  description  other  than  he  actually  pos- 
sesses and  is  legally  entitled  to,  or  shall  use  any  name,  title, 
addition  or  description  implying  or  calculated  to  lead  people 
to  infer  or  believe  him  to  be  a  duly  qualified  licentiate  of 
dentistry,  he  shall  be  liable,  upon  conviction  in  a  summary 
manner  before  any  Justice  of  the  Peace  having  jurisdiction 
where  the  offense  is  committed,  to  a  penalty  not  exceeding 
two  hundred  dollars  and  not  less  than  fifty  dollars  for  the 
first  offense,  and  for  each  and  every  subsequent  offense  to  a 
penalty  of  four  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  27.  All-prosecutions  under  the  provisions  hereof 
may  be  brought  and  heard  before  any  Justice  of  the  Peace 
having  jurisdiction  where  the  offense  is  committed,  and  such 
Justice  of  the  Peace  shall  have  power,  in  addition  to  the 
aforesaid  penalty,  to  award  payment  of  costs,  and  in  case 
such  penalty  and  costs  be  not  paid  forthwith  after  conviction, 
he  shall  have  power  to  issue  a  warrant  of  distress  therefor 
against  the  goods  and  chattels  of  the  party  so  convicted. 

Sec.  28.  In  any  such  prosecution  and  trial,  the  onus  of 
proof  as  to  being  a  legally  qualified  licentiate  of  dentistry  is 
upon  the  person  charged. 

Sec.  29.  Any  penalties  imposed  by  this  Act  may  be  also 
proceeded  for  or  recovered  by  suit  in  any  court  of  law  hav- 
ing jurisdiction,  and  one-half  of  all  penalties  recovered  shall 
go  to  the  prosecutor,  and  the  remainder  shall  be  paid  to  the 
Secretary -Treasurer  of  the  Association  and  form  part  of  the 
funds  of  the  Association.     Any  person  may  be  complainant 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  399 

or  prosecutor,  provided  always  that  every  such  prosecution 
shall  he  commenced  within  six  months  of  the  alleged  offense. 

Sec.  30.  No  person  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  in  any 
court  of  law  for  any  professional  services  rendered  or  ma- 
terials provided  by  him  in  the  exercise  of  the  profession  of 
a  dentist,  unless  he  be  a  duly  and  legally  qualified  licentiate 
of  dentistry  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  31.  Nothing  in  this  Act  contained  shall  interfere 
with  the  privileges  conferred  upon  physicians  and  surgeons 
by  the  various  Acts  relating  to  the  practice  of  medicine  and 
surgery  in  this  Province  ;  but  in  case  a  regular  physician  or 
surgeon  shall  desire  to  practice  dentistry  as  a  profession,  and 
to  publicly  avow  himself  as  a  practitioner  of  said  profession 
of  dentistry,  he  shall  first  obtain  a  license  from  said  Board 
of  Directors  by  paying  the  necessary  fees  and  passing  an 
examination  in  operative  and  mechanical  dentistry  only. 

Sec  32.  This  Act  shall  be  cited  as  the  Manitoba  Dental 
Association  Act. 

Assented  to  July  7th,  1883. 


NEW  BRUNSWICK* 


An  Act  Relating  to  the  Registration  and  Qualification  of  Dental 

Surgeons. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor,  Legislative  Coun- 
cil, and  Assembly,  as  follows  : 

Section  1.  This  Act  may  be  cited  as  "  The  New  Bruns- 
wick Dental  Act,  1890." 

Sec  2.  All  persons  who  are  qualified  to  register  under 
section  23  of  this  Act,  and  who  do  register  after  the  passing 
of  this  Act,  shall  constitute  "  The  New  Brunswick  Dental 
Society,"  hereinafter  called  the  "  Society." 

Sec  3.  The  officers  of  the  Society  shall  be  a  President, 
a  Vice-President  and  a  Secretary. 

*  The  copy  of  the  laws  lurnished   by  kindness  of  Dr.  Geo    W.  Beers, 
{of  Dominion  Journal.) 


400  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  4.  There  shall  be  a  Dental  Council  composed  of  seven 
registered  dentists,  or  dental  surgeons,  three  of  whom  shall  be 
nominated  and  appointed  by  the  Governor  in  Council,  and 
four  by  the  Society,  of  which  Council  any  five  shall  constitute 
a  quorum  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  provisions  of 
this  Act. 

Sec.  5.  The  Dental  Council  shall  be  styled  and  named 
"  The  Council  of  Dental  Surgeons  of  New  Brunswick,"  in 
this  Act  called  "  The  Council." 

Sec.  6.  No  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  shall  be  appointed 
a  member  of  the  Council,  unless  he  shall  have  practiced  den- 
tistry within  the  Province  for  a  period  of  five  years,  or  has 
obtained  a  degree  from  some  university  or  college  of  dentistry 
entitling  him  to  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  7.  The  first  four  members  of  the  Council  appointed 
by  the  Society,  shall  be  appointed  by  nomination  and  ballot, 
at  the  first  meeting  of  the  Society  hereinafter  provided  for 
in  section  45  of  this  Act,  and  such  four  members,  together 
with  the  three  members  appointed  by  the  Governor  in  Coun- 
cil, shall  meet  immediately  at  the  close  of  such  meeting,  and 
organize  for  the  purpose  of  fully  carrying  out  the  provisions 
of  this  Act. 

Sec  8.  The  members  of  the  Council  appointed  by  the 
Governor  in  Council  shall  hold  office  for  a  term  of  four  years 
from  the  date  of  their  appointment  or  until  voluntary  resig- 
nation, if  such  resignation  takes  place  before  the  expiration 
of  the  four  years,  or  until  other  members  are  duly  appointed 
in  their  place  and  stead ;  and  the  members  appointed  by  or 
on  behalf  of  the  Society  for  three  years  from  the  date  of  the 
appointment  or  until  voluntary  resignation,  if  such  resigna- 
tion takes  place  before  the  expiration  of  the  three  years  or 
until  other  members  are  duly  appointed  in  their  place  and 
stead ;  provided,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Governor  in 
Council,  at  any  time,  to  remo  ve  any  member  of  the  Council 
upon  written  request  of  two-thirds  of  the  remaining  mem- 
bers of  the  Council,  and  due  cause  shown. 

Sec  9.  The  Council  shall  immediately,  upon  the  occur- 
rence of  a  vacancy  therein  communicate  the  fact  to  the  Gov- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  40  L 

■ernor  in  Council  or  to  the  Society,  according  as  such  vacancy 
shall  have  to  be  filled  by  the  one  or  the  other  of  those  bodies, 
and  shall  also  notify  either  of  such  bodies  of  any  other  busi- 
ness requiring  the  attention  of  the  same  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  10.  Every  vacancy  in  the  Council,  whether  caused 
by  death,  resignation,  removal  from  ofiice,  or  otherwise,  shall 
be  tilled  up  by  the  body  or  authority  which  shall  have  nom- 
inated and  appointed  the  person  causing  such  vacancy  with 
-as  little  delay  as  possible,  so  that,  as  far  as  practicable,  the 
Council  shall  always  consist  of  seven  members,  three  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor  in  Council,  four  by  the  Society.  In 
case  of  neglect  or  refusal  of  the  Society  to  fill  up  a  vacancy 
which  they  are  empowered  and  directed  by  this  section  to 
supply,  within  three  months  after  such  vacancy  shall  have 
been  caused,  the  remaining  members  of  the  Council  shall 
nominate  and  appoint  a  properly  qualified  person  to  fill  such 
vacancy.  In  case  of  a  similar  neglect  or  refusal  on  the  part 
of  the  Governor  in  Council,  the  Council  shall  exercise  the  like 
power. 

Sec.  11.  The  Council  shall  hold  a  meeting,  called  the  an- 
nual meeting,  every  year  at  such  place  as  a  majority  of  the 
•Council  may  decide,  to  transact  all  necessary  business,  and 
such  meeting  may  be  continued  by  adjournment  from  day  to 
-day  until  the  business  before  the  Council  is  finished.  The 
•Council  shall  also  have  power,  and  it  shall  be  their  duty,  to 
hold  such  other  meetings  as  may  be  necessary  in  addition  to 
the  annual  meeting. 

Sec  12.  The  books  and  accounts  of  the  Council  shall  at 
all  times  be  open  to  the  examination  of  such  persons  as  the 
Governor  in  Council  or  the  Society  shall  appoint  to  inspect 
the  same,  and  also  of  all  the  members  of  the  Council,  and 
the  accounts  shall  be  annually  published  or  filed  in  the  ofiice 
of  the  Provincial  Secretary. 

Sec.  13.  The  Council  shall  have  power,  and  it  shall  be 
their  duty :  First,  to  elect  a  Secretary  from  among  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Society  to  act  as  Secretary  of  the  Council,  who 
shall,  among  other  things,  attend  the  meetings  of  the  Council, 
and  keep  a  record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  same  in  a  book, 


402  APPENDIX. 

or  books,  to  be  provided  by  him  for  that  purpose.    Secondly r 

to  elect  a  President,  Treasurer  and  such  other  officers  as  may 
be  necessary.  Thirdly,  to  cause  every  member  of  the  pro- 
fession practicing  in  New  Brunswick  to  register  his  name, 
place  of  residence,  the  date  of  his  diploma,  if  he  has  one,  and 
the  place  where  be  obtained  it,  in  the  dental  register  herein- 
after provided  for.  Fourthly,  to  make  all  such  orders,  rules, 
regulations  and  by-laws  for  carrying  this  Act  into  effect  as  to 
the  Council  shall  seem  proper  or  necessary,  which  orders, 
rules,  regulations  and  by-laws  shall  not  be  inconsistent  with 
this  Act,  and  may  be  disallowed  by  the  Governor  in 
Council. 

Sec.  14.  The  rules  and  regulations,  if  any,  as  to  the  times 
and  places  of  the  meetings  of  the  Council,  and  the  mode  of 
summoning  the  same  by  the  Council,  shall  remain  in  force 
until  altered  by  any  subsequent  meeting.  In  the  absence  of 
any  rule  or  regulation  as  to  the  summoning  of  meetings  of 
the  Council,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  President  thereof  to 
summon,  at  such  time  and  place  as  to  him  shall  seem  fit,  by 
circular  letter  mailed  to  the  address  of  each  member  so  far  as 
known  to  him ;  he  shall  in  like  manner  summon  a  meeting 
of  the  Council  upon  the  requisition  of  a  majority  of  the  mem- 
bers thereof ;  provided  always,  that  at  least  ten  days'  notice 
of  such  meeting  shall  be  given ;  in  the  event  of  the  absence 
of  the  President  from  any  meeting,  some  other  member,  to  be 
chosen  from  among  the  members  present,  shall  act  as  Presi- 
dent. All  acts  of  the  Council  shall  be  decided  by  a  majority 
of  the  members  present.  At  all  meetings,  the  President  shall 
vote  only  in  case  of  a  tie. 

Sec.  15.  All  moneys  forming  part  of  the  funds  of  the 
Council  shall  be  paid  to  the  Treasurer,  and  shall  be  applied 
to  carrying  this  Act  into  execution. 

Sec.  16.  Each  applicant  for  registration  shall,  if  required 
by  the  Council,  pay  before  registration  to  the  Registrar  of 
the  Council,  or  any  person  deputed  by  said  Registrar  to  re- 
ceive it,  such  fee  as  may  be  determined  on  by  by-law  of  the 
Council,  not  less  than  one  dollar,  nor  more  than  five  dollars, 
which  fee  shall  thereupon  be  paid  by  said  Registrar  to  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE. 


403 


Treasurer,  and  payment  of  such  fee  shall  be.  a  condition  pre- 
cedent to  registration. 

Sec.  17.  Each  registered  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  shall, 
if  required  by  the  Council,  pay  to  the  Treasurer,  or  any  person 
deputed  by  the  Treasurer  to  receive  it,  such  annual  fee  as- 
may  be  determined  by  by-law  of  the  Council,  not  less  than 
one  dollar,  nor  more  than  three  dollars. 

Sec  18.  If  any  registered  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  do 
not  pay  the  annual  fee  required  by  the  Council  under  section 
17,  prior  to  the  first  day  of  January  in  each  year,  he  shall 
thereupon  cease  to  be  deemed  registered ;  and,  if  any  such 
fee  remains  due  from  any  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  on  the 
first  day  of  January  in  any  year,  the  name  of  such  person 
shall  not  be  printed  or  published  in  the  Royal  Gazette  in  such 
year,  as  provided  in  section  22,  but  any  such  practitioner, 
upon  the  payment  of  all  arrears  of  such  fees,  shall  thereupon 
be  registered  and  be  deemed  registered  from  the  time  of  such 
payment. 

Sec  19.  The  Secretary  of  the  Council  shall  also  be  the 
Registrar  of  the  Council,  herein  called  "The  Registrar," 
and  shall  be  paid  such  salary  as  the  Council  may  determine. 

Sec  20.  The  Registrar  shall  make  and  keep  a  correct 
register  in  the  form  set  forth  in  Schedule  A  to  this  Act,  of 
the  names  in  alphabetical  order,  according  to  the  surnames  cf 
the  persons  registered  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  with 
the  other  particulars  required  by  said  schedule,  which  regis- 
ter shall  be  called  the  "  Dental  Register,"  herein  called  the 
"•  Register." 

Sec  21.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Registrar  to  keep 
his  register  correct,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this 
Act,  and  the  rules,  orders  and  regulations  of  the  Council, 
and  to  erase  the  names  of  all  registered  persons  who  shall 
have  died,  left  the  Province  without  any  intention  of  return- 
ing, or  ceased  to  practice  for  a  period  of  five  years ;  and  he 
shall,  from  time  to  time,  make  the  necessary  alterations  in 
the  addresses  or  qualifications  of  the  persons  registered  un- 
der this  Act ;  provided  always,  that  the  name  of  any  person 


404  APPENDIX. 

erased  from  the  register  shall  he  restored  by  order  of  the 
Council  upon  sufficient  cause  duly  shown. 

Sec.  22.  The  Registrar  shall,  before  the  firsl  day  of  May 
in  every  year,  cause  to  be  printed  and  published  in  the  Royal 
■Gazette  of  this  Province,  and  in  such  other  manner,  if  any, 
as  the  Council  shall  appoint,  a  correct  copy  of  the  register  as 
existing  on  the  first  day  of  January  next  preceding  such 
publication,  and  any  printed  copy  of  the  register  purporting 
to  be  so  printed  and  published  as  aforesaid,  or  a  certified 
copy,  under  the  hand  of  the  Registrar  of  the  entry  of  the 
name  of  any  person  on  the  register,  shall  be  prima  facie  evi- 
dence that  the  person  or  persons  mentioned  in  such  printed 
copy  or  certificate,  are  registered  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  at  the  date  mentioned  in  such  printed  copy  or  certificate, 
and  such  certificate  shall  be  admitted  in  evidence,  without 
proof  of  the  signature  of  the  Registrar. 

Sec.  23.  No  person  shall  be  entitled  to  be  registered  un- 
der this  Act,  unless  he  shall  satisfy  the  Registrar  by  proper 
evidence : 

1.  That  he  has  fulfilled  all  the  requirements  for  gradu- 
ation in  any  one  of  the  colleges  or  dental  schools  in  the  United 
States  of  America  recognized  by  the  National  Association  of 
Dental  Faculties,  or  in  any  other  college  or  dental  school 
recognized  by  the  Council ;  or, 

2.  That  he  was  practicing  dentistry  in  this  Province 
before  the  first  day  of  January,  A.  D.  1889,  and  has  since 
that  time  continued  regularly  to  practice  as  a  dentist  or  den- 
tal surgeon  therein  ;  provided,  however,  that  temporary  absence 
from  practice  in  the  Province  while  attending  a  dental  col- 
lege or  school  since  that  date,  shall  not  prevent  his  being 
registered  hereunder;  prodded,  that,  if  any  applicant  for 
registration  or  any  registered  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  is  dis- 
satisfied with  the  decision  of  the  Registrar,  the  question 
shall  be  referred  to  the  Council  for  its  decision,  and  any 
person  objecting  to  the  decision  of  the  Council  may  appeal 
to  the  Governor  in  Council.  The  Governor  in  Council  is 
hereby  empowered  to  affirm,  alter  in  any  way,  or  reverse  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  405 

decision  of  the  Council,  and  the  Council  shall  forthwith  give 
effect  to  such  decision  on  appeal. 

Sec.  24.  Every  person  registered  under  this  Act,  who 
may  have  obtained  any  higher  degree  or  qualification  other 
than  the  qualification  in  respect  of  which  he  may  have  been 
registered,  shall  be  entitled  to  have  such  higher  degree  or 
additional  qualification  inserted  in  the  register  in  substitution 
for  or  in  addition  to  the  qualification  previously  registered, 
on  the  payment  of  such  fee  as  the  Council  may  demand. 

Sec  25.  Xo  qualification  shall  be  entered  upon  the 
register  either  upon  the  first  registration  or  by  way  of  an 
addition  to  a  registered  name,  unless  the  Registrar  shall  be 
satisfied,  by  the  proper  evidence,  that  the  person  claiming  is 
entitled  to  it,  and  appeal  may  be  made  as  in  section  23. 

Sec.  26.  If  in  any  case  it  shall  be  proven  to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  Council,  on  appeal  by  registered  dentist  or 
dental  surgeon,  that  any  entry  in  the  register  was  fraudu- 
lently or  incorrectly  made,  the  Council  may  order  the  entry 
to  be  erased  or  amended,  as  the  case  may  be,  and,  if  it  shall 
be  proven  to  their  satisfaction  that  any  person  has  fraudu- 
lently registered,  or  attempted  to  register,  the  name  of  such 
person  may,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Council,  be  published  in 
the  Royal  Gazette. 

Sec  27.  Any  registered  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  who 
shall  have  been  convicted  of  any  felony  in  any  court,  or  shall, 
after  due  inquiry,  be  judged  by  the  Council  to  have  been 
guilty  of  infamous  conduct  in  any  professional  respect,  shall 
thereby,  subject  to  an  appeal  to  the  Governor  in  Council, 
forfeit  his  right  to  registration,  and,  by  direction  of  the 
Council,  his  name  shall  be  erased  from  the  register. 

Sec  28.  Subject  to  the  exceptions  hereinafter  named,  no 
person  not  registered  under  this  Act  shall  practice  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery  in  this  Province,  or  be  entitled  to  any  of  the 
rights  or  privileges  conferred  by  this  Act. 

Sec  29.  Every  person  who  shall  be  registered  under  this 
Act  shall  be  entitled  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental  surgery 
in  this  Province,  and  to  demand  and  recover,  in  any  court  of 
law  of  competent  jurisdiction,  reasonable  and   customary 


400  APPENDIX. 

charges  for  professional  services,  and  the  cost  of  any  medicine 
supplied  by  him  as  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  to  his  patients. 

Sec.  30.  No  person  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  any 
charges  in  any  court  of  law  for  services  as  dentist  or  dental 
surgeon,  or  for  any  medicine  which  he  shall  have  both  pre- 
scribed and  supplied,  unless  he  shall  prove  upon  the  trial, 
that,  at  the  time  the  services  were  performed  or  the  medicine 
prescribed  and  supplied,  he  was  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  31.  The  words,  "legally  qualified  dental  prac- 
titioner," or,  "  duly  qualified  dental  practitioner,"  or  any 
other  words  importing  a  person  recognized  by  law  as  a  den- 
tist or  dental  surgeon,  or  member  of  the  dental  profession, 
when  used  in  any  Act  of  the  Legislature,  or  legal  or  public 
document,  shall  be  construed  to  mean  a  person  registered 
under  this  Act. 

Sec.  32.  No  person  shall  be  appointed  as  dental  officer 
or  dental  surgeon  in  any  branch  of  public  service,  or  in  any 
hospital  or  other  charitable  institution,  unless  he  be  registered 
under  this  Act. 

Sec  33.  No  certificate  required  by  an}'  Act  now  in  force 
or  that  may  hereafter  be  passed,  from  any  dentist  or  dental 
surgeon,  shall  be  valid,  unless  the  person  signing  the  same 
shall  be  registered  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  34.  If  any  person  not  registered  under  this  Act  prac- 
tices dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  any  form  for  hire,  gain  or 
hope  of  reward,  he  shall  thereby  forfeit  a  sum  of  twenty  dol- 
lars for  each  day  upon  which  he  so  practices. 

Sec.  35.  Any  person  who  attempts  to  evade  the  law  by 
causing  his  services  as  a  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  to  be  in- 
directly paid  for  in  any  manner,  whether  by  the  sale  of  drugs 
or  medicines  or  otherwise,  shall  forfeit  the  sum  of  twenty 
dollars  for  each  offense. 

Sec.  36.  If  the  Registrar  make  or  cause  to  be  made  any 
willful  falsification  in  any  matter  relating  to  the  register,  he 
shall  forfeit  the  sum  of  one  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  37.  If  any  person  shall  willfully  procure  or  attempt 
to  procure  himself  to  be  registered  under  this  Act  by  making 
or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or  produced,  any  false  or 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  407 

fraudulent  declaration  or  representation,  either  verbally  or 
in  writing,  every  such  person  so  doing,  and  every  person 
knowingly  aiding  or  assisting  him  therein,  shall  forfeit  the 
sum  of  one  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  38.  Any  person  who  shall  willfully  and  falsely  pre- 
tend to  be  registered  under  this  Act,  or  take  or  use  any 
name,  title,  addition  or  description  implying  that  he  is  so 
registered,  shall  forfeit  the  sum  of  one  hundred  dollars. 

Sec.  39.  Any  sum  forfeited  under  any  section  of  this 
Act  shall  be  recoverable,  with  costs,  and  may  be  sued  for  and 
recovered  in  the  same  manner  as  a  private  debt,  in  the  name 
of  "  The  New  Brunswick  Dental  Society,"  at  the  instance  of 
the  President  or  Secretary  thereof,  and,  being  recovered,  shall 
belong  to  the  Council ;  provided,  that  where  the  information 
leading  to  such  recovery  shall  have  been  given  by  any  person 
not  registered  under  this  Act,  such  person  shall  be  entitled 
to  receive  one-half  of  the  sum  so  recovered. 

Sec  40.  Upon  the  trial  of  such  cause,  the  burden  of 
proof  as  to  the  right  of  the  defendant  to  practice  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery  shall  be  upon  the  defendant. 

Sec.  41.  No  suit  shall  be  commenced  under  this  Act 
after  one  year  from  the  date  of  the  offense  or  cause  of  action. 

Sec.  42.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  prevent  any  person 
from  giving  necessary  aid  as  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  to  any 
one  in  urgent  need  of  it,  provided  that  such  aid  is  not  given 
for  hire,  gain  or  hope  of  reward,  nor  the  giving  of  it  made  a 
business,  or  way  of  gaining  a  livelihood  either  directly  or 
indirectly  by  such  person. 

Sec  43.  This  Act  shall  not  apply  to  or  be  construed  to 
oxtend  to  any  duly  qualified  medical  practitioner  extracting 
teeth,  nor  any  paid  assistant  not  registered  under  this  Act 
employed  by  any  registered  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  in  his 
office  ;  but  this  section  shall  not  be  construed  to  permit  any 
such  assistant  to  act  as  dentist  or  dental  surgeon  outside  of 
the  office  of  his  employer. 

Sec  44.  For  the  purpose  of  organization  of  this  Society, 
all  persons  who  at  the  passing  of  this  Act  are  entitled  to  and 
claim  the  right  to  register  hereunder,  shall  file  a  memoran- 


408  APPENDIX. 

dum  of  their  names  and  places  of  residence  and  practice,  with 
their  post-office  address  and  qualification,  in  the  office  of  the 
Provincial  Secretary,  at  Fredericton,  on  or  before  the  tirst 
day  of  August,  A.  D.  1890,  and  the  Governor  in  Council 
shall,  on  or  before  said  day,  appoint  from  the  persons  who 
shall  have  filed  such  memorandum  three  Scrutineers,  who 
shall  meet  in  the  city  of  Fredericton,  on  the  second  Tuesday 
in  said  month  of  August,  at  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon, 
there  to  receive,  examine  and  decide  as  to  the  sufficiency  of 
the  certificates,  or  other  evidences  of  qualification,  of  those 
claiming  to  be  entitled  to  take  part  in  the  organization  of 
the  Society,  who  have  filed  the  memorandum  aforesaid. 
Only  those  persons  decided  by  said  Scrutineers,  or  a  majority 
of  them,  to  be  qualified  for  registry  under  section  23,  shall 
be  so  entitled. 

Sec.  45.  The  first  annual  meeting  of  the  Society  shall 
be  held  on  the  second  Tuesday  in  August,  A.  D.  1890,  at 
three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  in  the  city  of  Fredericton,  at 
a  place  to  be  appointed  by  said  Scrutineers,  at  which  time 
and  place  those  persons  decided  by  the  Scrutineers  under  the 
next  preceding  section  to  be  entitled  to  take  part  in  the 
organization  of  the  Society,  shall  meet  and  organize  by  elect- 
ing: from  anions;  their  number  a  President,  a  Vice-President 
and  a  Secretary  ;  they  shall  have  power,  and  it  shall  be  their 
duty,  to  adopt  by-laws  not  inconsistent  with  this  Act,  and  a 
code  of  dental  ethics  for  the  guidance  of  the  members  of  the 
Society,  and  to  transact  such  other  business  as  may  be  neces- 
sary under  this  Act,  or  under  the  by-laws  by  them  adopted. 

Passed  April  23d,  1890. 


NOVA  SCOTIA* 


Assented  to  this  19th  day  of  May,  1891.    31.  B.  Daly,  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor. 

PREAMBLE. 

Whereas,  by  petition  it  has  been  represented  that  the 
profession  of  dentistry  is  extensively  practiced  in  the  Pro- 

*  The  copy  of  the  Utws  furnished  by  kindness  of  Dr.  Geo.  W.  Beers, 

(of  Dominion  Journal.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  409 

vince  of  Novia  Scotia,  and  that  it  is  expedient  for  the  pro- 
tection of  the  public  that  there  should,  by  enactment,  be  es- 
tablished a  certain  standard  of  qualification  required  of  each 
practitioner  of  the  said  profession,  and  that  certain  privileges 
and  protection  should  be  afforded  to  such  practitioners  ; 

Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  Governor,  Council  and  Assem- 
bly, as  follows: 

I.      INCORPORATED   NAME. 

Section  1.  The  persons  named  in  section  II  of  this  Act 
shall  be  incorporated  and  known  as  "  The  Dental  Associa- 
tion of  the  Province  of  Novia  Scotia." 

Sec.  2.  Until  such  other  persons  be  elected  as  hereinafter 
provided, 

Alfred  Chipman  Cogswell,  William  Clark  Delaney, 
Hibbert  Woodbury,  Frank  Woodbury,  James  Albert  Mer- 
rill, Arthur  Wellesley  Cogswell,  Robert  William  McDonald, 
Raymond  Hays  Mulloney,  Charles  Henry  Fluck,  Clarence 
Ulysses  Smith,  Cyrus  Kingsbury  Fisk,  of  Halifax  ; 

C.  S.  Marshall,  of  Liverpool ; 

George  Hyde,  M.  K.  Langille,  of  Truro ; 

A.  J.  McKenna,  John  Edward  Mulloney,  of  Kentville ; 

J.  R.  Fritz,  of  Digby ; 

Charles  E.  Wolff,  of  New  Glascow ; 

Frederick  William  Stevens,  of  Dartmouth  ; 

W.  A.  Payzant,  of  Wolfville ; 

A.  C.  Harding,  of  Yarmouth ; 

James  Primrose,  of  Annapolis  ; 

E.  L.  Fuller,  of  Amherst ; 
Charles  Wilson  Muir,  of  Shelburne  ; 
S.  W.  Eaton,  of  Canning ; 

F.  H.  Parker,  of  Harborville  ; 
Henry  Fraser,  of  Pictou  ; 
George  A.  Polly,  of  Lunenburg  ; 
Frederick  Primrose,  of  Bridgeton ; 
Horace  E.  Eaton,  of  Parrsboro ; 

M.  P.  Harrington,  of  Liverpool ;  shall  be  Trustees,  six 
of  whom  Bhall  form  a  quorum. 


410  APPENDIX. 

They  shall  have  power  to  appoint  three  of  their  mem- 
bers, who,  with  four  others,  to  be  a]  (pointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor in  Council,  shall  form  a  Board  which  Rhall  he  known 
as  the  "Provincial  Dental  Board  of  No  via  Scotia." 

Sec.  3.  The  board  shall  have  power  and  authority  to 
take,  receive,  hold  and  enjoy  real  and  personal  property 
donated,  given,  granted,  devised,  bequeathed  or  otherwise 
bestowed  upon  or  conveyed  to  them,  and  shall  hold  the  same 
in  each  case  in  trust  for  such  purpose  as  may  be  mentioned  by 
the  donor,  and,  if  no' such  purpose  is  so  mentioned,  then  the 
board  may  mortgage,  lease  or  otherwise  dispose  of  any  such 
property  for  the  furtherance  of  the  "  Dental  Association  of 
the  Province  of  Novia  Scotia." 

And  that  the  Association  shall  have  a  common  seal, 
with  power  to  change,  amend,  cancel  or  renew  the  same. 

II.      THE    PROVINCIAL    DENTAL    BOARD. 

Sec.  4.  The  Provincial  Dental  Board  shall  consist  of 
seven  members,  as  hereinbefore  stated,  who  shall  hold  office 
for  two  years,  four  of  which  shall  form  a  quorum.  Any 
member  may  resign  by  letter  directed  to  the  Secretary,  and,  in 
the  event  of  a  vacancy  occurring  by  death  or  otherwise  ot 
an  appointee  of  the  association  or  board,  the  remaining 
members  of  the  board  shall  elect  some  fit  and  proper  person 
from  the  licentiates  to  supply  the  vacancy,  and,  in  the  event 
of  a  vacancy  by  death  or  otherwise  of  an  appointee  of  the 
Governor  in  Council,  the  Governor  in  Council  shall  appoint  a 
proper  person  from  among  the  licentiates  to  fill  the  vacancy. 

The  Provincial  Dental  Board  shall  have  power  and  it 
shall  be  their  duty  : 

1.  To  elect  a  President  and  such  other  officers,  includ- 
ing the  Secretary  and  Registrar,  as  may  be  necessary  to  the 
working  of  this  chapter. 

2.  To  regulate  the  study  of  dentistry,  operative  and 
prosthetic,  by  making  rules  not  inconsistent  with  this  chap- 
ter, with  regard  to  the  preliminary  qualification,  course  of 
Btudy  to  be  followed,  the  final  examination  and  the  nature 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  411 

of  the  evidence  to  be  produced  before  the  board  upon  those 
subjects. 

3.  To  appoint  fit  and  proper  persons  to  conduct  the 
preliminary  or  matriculation  examination,  and  to  fix  the 
remuneration,  if  any,  to  be  paid  to  such  examiners. 

4.  To  examine  all  degrees,  diplomas,  licenses  and  other 
credentials  presented  or  given  in  evidence  under  this  chapter, 
for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  owner  of  such  credentials  to 
attest  on  oath  or  by  affidavit  that  he  is  the  person  whose 
name  is  mentioned  therein,  and  that  he  became  possessed 
thereof  honestly. 

5.  To  cause  every  member  of  the  profession  practicing 
in  Novia  Scotia  to  register  his  name,  age,  place  of  residence, 
place  of  nativity,  the  date  of  his  license  or  diploma,  and  the 
place  where  he  obtained  it  with  the  Registrar  of  the  Board. 

6.  To  make  orders  and  regulations  for  regulating  the 
registers  to  be  kept  under  this  chapter. 

7.  To  make  all  such  rules,  regulations  and  by-laws  for 
carrying  this  chapter  into  effect,  as  to  the  board  shall  seem 
proper  or  necessary,  which  rules,  regulations  and  by-laws 
shall  not  be  inconsistent  with  this  chapter. 

8.  To  appoint  as  many  examiners  to  hold  final  exami- 
nations when  necessary,  as  the  board  shall  deem  proper,  such 
examiners  to  be  regularly  qualified  dental  practitioners  of  not 
less  than  three  years'  professional  standing,  and  three  years' 
residence  in  this  Province. 

Sec.  6.  The  Provincial  Dental  Board,  or  a  majority  of 
members  composing  the  same,  shall  appoint  from  time  to  time 
a  regularly  qualified  dental  practitioner,  resident  in  Halifax, 
to  act  as  Secretary  of  the  board,  who  shall  attend  the  meet- 
ings of  the  board  and  keep  a  record  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  same  in  a  book,  or  books,  to  be  provided  for  that  purpose, 
together  with  all  such  matters  and  things  as  to  the  board 
shall  appertain. 

Sec.  7.  The  Secretary  shall  also  be  the  Registrar  of  the 
Provincial  Dental  Board,  and  shall  be  paid  such  salary  out 
of  the  moneys  to  be  received  as  hereinafter  provided,  as  the 


412  APPENDIX. 

board  shall,  with  the  approval  of  the  Provincial  Dental 
Association,  determine. 

Sec.  8.  The  Registrar  of  the  board  shall,  before  the  first 
day  of  September  in  every  year,  cause  to  be  printed  and  pub- 
lished in  the  Royal  Gazette  of  the  Province,  and  in  such  other 
manner  as  the  board  shall  appoint,  a  correct  register  of  the 
names  in  alphabetical  order,  according  to  the  surnames,  with 
their  respective  residences  (in  the  form  set  forth  in  Schedule 
"A  "  of  this  chapter,  or  to  the  like  effect),  and  dental  titles, 
diplomas  and  qualifications  conferred  by  any  college  or  body, 
with  the  dates  thereof  of  all  persons  appearing  on  the  register 
as  existing  on  the  first  day  of  August  in  such  year,  and 
such  register  shall  be  called  "  The  Dental  Register,"  and  a 
copy  of  such  register  for  the  time  being,  purporting  to  be  so 
printed  and  published,  as  aforesaid,  shall  be  prima  facie  evi- 
dence in  all  courts,  and  before  all  Justices  of  the  Peace  and 
others,  that  the  persons  therein  specified  are  registered  ac- 
cording to  the  provisions  of  this  chapter,  and  the  absence  of 
the  name  of  any  person  from  such  copy  shall  be  'prima  facie 
evidence  that  such  person  is  not  registered  according  to  the 
provisions  of  this  chapter;  'provided  always,  that,  in  the 
case  of  any  person  whose  name  does  not  appear  in  such  copy, 
a  certified  copy,  under  the  hand  of  the  Registrar  of  the  board, 
of  the  entry  of  the  name  of  such  person  on  the  register,  shall 
be  evidence  that  such  person  is  registered  under  the  provi- 
sions of  this  chapter. 

Sec,  9.  The  books  and  accounts  of  the  board  shall  at  all 
times  be  open  to  the  examination  of  any  practitioner,  duly 
qualified  under  this  chapter. 

Sec.  10.  The  rules  and  regulations,  if  any,  as  to  the  times 
and  places  of  the  meetings  of  the  board  and  the  mode  of  sum- 
moning the  same  already  made  by  the  board,  shall  remain 
in  force  until  altered  at  any  subsequent  meeting.  In  the  ab- 
sence of  any  rule  or  regulation  as  to  the  summoning  of  future 
meetings  of  the  board,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  President 
thereof  to  summon  the  same  at  such  time  and  place  as  to  him 
shall  seem  fit,  by  circular  letter  to  be  mailed  to  each  member ; 
provided  always,  that  at  least  ten  days'  notice  of  such  meet- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  413 

ing  shall  be  given.  In  the  event  of  the  absence  of  the  Presi- 
dent from  any  meeting,  some  other  member,  to  be  chosen 
from  among  the  members  present,  shall  act  as  President. 

Sec  1 1 .  Hereafter  no  person  shall  begin  or  enter  upon  the 
study  of  dentistry  in  any  or  all  of  its  several  branches,  for  the 
purpose  of  qualifying  himself  to  practice  the  same  in  this 
Province,  unless  he  shall  have  obtained  from  the  Provincial 
Dental  Board  a  certificate  that  he  has  satisfactorily  passed  a 
matriculation  or  preliminary  examination  in  the  subjects 
specified  in  Schedule  UB"  to  this  chapter. 

Sec.  12.  No  candidate  shall  be  admitted  to  such  matricu- 
lation or  preliminary  examination,  unless  he  shall  have,  at  least 
fourteen  days  previous  to  such  examination,  given  notice  to 
the  Registrar  of  the  board  of  his  intention  to  present  himself 
for  such  examination,  and  transmitted  to  the  Registrar  a 
certificate  showing  that  he  has  completed  his  sixteenth  year, 
and  shall,  before  the  examination,  have  paid  a  fee  of  ten  (10) 
dollars  to  the  Registrar. 

Sec  13.  Subject  to  the  exceptions  hereinafter  made,  no 
person  shall  practice  dentistry  in  all  or  any  of  its  several 
branches  in  Nova  Scotia,  unless  his  name  shall  be  registered 
in  the  book  of  registry  of  the  Provincial  Dental  Board,  and 
unless  he  shall  have  received  from  such  board  a  license  to 
practice. 

Sec  14.  No  person  shall  be  entitled  to  have  his  name  en- 
tered in  the  register  of  the  Provincial  Dental  Board,  or  to  re- 
ceive a  license  to  practice  from  such  Board,  unless  he  shall  satisfy 
the  board  that  he  has  passed  the  matriculation  or  preliminary 
examination;  and  after  passing  such  examination  he  has 
followed  his  studies  during  a  period  of  not  less  than  three 
years  (12  months  of  which  may  be  under  the  direction  of  one 
or  more  regularly  qualified  dental  practitioners) ;  that  during 
such  three  years  he  has  attended  at  some  university,  college 
or  incorporated  school  of  dentistry  in  good  standing,  courses 
of  lectures,  amounting  together  to  not  less  than  twelve 
months,  on  general  and  practical  anatomy,  physiology,  chem- 
istry, operative  dentistry,  mechanical  dentistry  on  dental 
therapeutics ;  and  that  he  has  attended  the  clinics,  both  in 


414  APPENDIX. 

operative  and  mechanical  dentistry  in  some  university  or 
dental  college  recognized  by  the  board,  for  a  period  of  not 
less  than  two  years ;  that  he  has,  after  examination  in  the 
subjects  of  the  course,  obtained  a  degree  or  diploma  from 
such  university,  college,  or  incorporated  school  of  dentistry, 
or,  for  want  of  such  degree  or  diploma,  that  he  has  satisfac- 
torily passed  an  examination  in  the  various  branches  herein- 
before specified,  before  examiners  to  be  appointed  by  the 
Provincial  Dental  Board  ;  that  he  is  not  less  than  twenty-one 
years  of  age,  and  that  he  has  paid  to  the  Registrar  of  the 
board  a  fee  of  twenty  (20)  dollars ;  provided,  that  the  Provin- 
cial Dental  Board  shall  have  power,  with  the  approval  of  the 
Dental  Association,  to  make  such  alterations  in  the  foregoing 
curriculum  as  may  from  time  to  time  be  required,  subject  to 
the  approval  of  the  Governor  in  Council. 

Sec.  15.  The  last  preceding  section  shall  not  apply  to  any 
person  in  actual  practice  in  the  Province  of  Nova  Scotia,  pre- 
vious to  the  passing  of  this  Act,  but  such  person  shall  be  entitled 
to  be  registered  and  to  receive  a  license  to  practice  under  this 
chapter  by  payment  of  five  (5)  dollars  ;  and,  notwithstanding 
the  provisions  of  such  section,  any  person,  upon  producing  to 
the  Provincial  Dental  Board  conclusive  evidence  that  he  has 
passed  a  matriculation  or  preliminary  examination,  such  as 
is  required  by  this  chapter  for  persons  beginning  their  dental 
studies  in  Nova  Scotia ;  that  he  has,  before  graduating  or 
taking  a  diploma,  studied  for  at  least  three  years  in  the  man- 
ner provided  in  section  14  of  this  chapter,  or  pursued  what 
the  board  shall  deem  an  equivalent  course  of  study,  and  has 
passed  a  final  examination  in  the  subjects  of  such  course,  or, 
for  want  of  any  such  requisitions,  any  one  who  may  have 
commenced  their  studies  before  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and 
shall  have  fulfilled  such  conditions  as  the  board  may  determ- 
ine ;  and  shall  pay  a  fee  of  twenty  (20)  dollars,  shall  be  en- 
titled to  be  registered  and  to  receive  a  license  to  practice. 

Sec.  16.  Notwithstanding  anything  to  the  contrary  in  this 
chapter  contained,  any  person  who  shall  have  commenced  his 
dental  studies  before  the  passage  of  this  Act,  although  he 
may  not  have  passed  a  preliminary  or  matriculation  examina- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  415 

tion  required  by  this  Act,  but  has  otherwise  complied  with 
the  requisites  of  this  chapter,  shall  be  entitled  to  an  exami- 
nation by  the  board. 

Sec.  17.  All  acts  of  the  board  shall  be  decided  by  a 
majority  of  the  members  present.  At  all  meetings  the  Presi- 
dent for  the  time  being  shall  have  a  casting  vote  only. 

Sec  18.  All  moneys  forming  part  of  the  funds  of  the 
board  shall  be  paid  to  the  Treasurer,  and  shall  be  applied  to 
carrying  this  chapter  into  execution. 

Sec  19.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Registrar  to  keep  his 
register  correct  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  chap- 
ter, and  the  rules,  orders  and  regulations  of  the  Provincial  Den- 
tal Board,  and  to  erase  the  name  of  all  registered  persons  who 
shall  have  died,  left  the  Province  without  any  intention  of 
returning,  or  cease  to  practice  for  a  period  of  five  years ;  and 
he  shall,  from  time  to  time,  make  the  necessary  alterations  in 
the  address  or  qualifications  of  the  persons  registered  under 
this  chapter ;  provided  always,  that  the  name  of  any  person 
erased  from  the  register  shall  be  restored  by  order  of  the 
board,  upon  sufficient  cause  duly  shown  to  that  effect. 

Sec  20.  Any  person  residing  in  the  Province,  entitled  to 
practice  at  the  passage  of  this  Act,  must  be  registered  under 
this  chapter  within  sixty  days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act, 
and  any  one  who  shall  neglect  or  omit  to  be  so  registered  shall 
not  be  entitled  to  any  of  the  rights  or  privileges  conferred 
by  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  so  long  as  such  neglect  or 
omission  shall  continue. 

Sec  21.  No  qualification  shall  be  entered  on  the  register, 
either  on  the  first  registration  or  by  way  of  addition  to  a  reg- 
istered name,  unless  the  Registrar  shall  be  satisfied,  by  the 
proper  evidence,  that  the  person  is  entitled  to  it ;  and  any  ap- 
peal from  the  decision  of  the  Registrar  may  be  decided  by  the 
board  ;  and  any  entry  which  shall  be  proven  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  board  to  have  been  fraudulently  or  incorrectly  made, 
may  be  erased  from  the  register  by  order,  in  writing,  of  the 
board. 

Sec  22.  Any  dental  practitioner  who  shall,  after  due  in- 
quiry, be  judged  by  the  board  to  have  been  guilty  of  infamous 


416  APPENDIX. 

conduct  in  any  professional  respect,  shall  thereby  forfeit  his 
right  to  registration  ;  and  his  name  shall,  if  registered  by  the 
direction  of  the  Provincial  Dental  Board,  be  erased  from  the 
register. 

Sec.  23.  Every  person  registered  under  this  chapter,  who 
may  have  obtained  any  degree  or  qualification  other  than  the 
qualification  in  respect  of  which  he  may  have  been  registered, 
shall  be  entitled  to  have  such  degree  or  additional  qualifica- 
tion inserted  in  the  register,  in  substitution  for  or  in  addi- 
tion to  the  qualification  previously  registered,  on  the  payment 
of  such  fee  as  the  board  may  appoint. 

Sec.  24.  Any  person  who  shall  be  registered  under  the 
provisions  of  this  chapter,  shall  be  entitled  to  practice  dentistry 
or  dental  surgery,  or  any  of  them,  as  the  case  may  be,  in  Nova 
Scotia,  and  to  demand  and  recover  in  any  court  of  law  rea- 
sonable charges  for  professional  aid  and  advice,  and  the  cost 
of  any  medicinal,  dental  or  surgical  appliances  rendered  or 
supplied  by  him  to  his  patients. 

Sec.  25.  No  person  shall  be  entitled  to  recover  any  charge 
in  any  court  of  law  for  any  professional  advice  or  attendance, 
or  for  the  performance  of  any  operation  appertaining  to  the 
practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery,  or  for  any  surgical  or 
dental  appliances  which  he  shall  have  supplied,  unless  he  shall 
prove,  upon  trial,  that  he  is  registered  under  this  chapter ;  pro- 
vided always,  t\\&t  this  clause  is  not  intended  to  interfere  with 
the  practice  of  regularly  qualified  medical  practitioners,  or  to 
interfere  with  the  legitimate  business  of  qualified  druggists 
or  chemists. 

Sec  26.  The  words,  "  legally  qualified  dental  practi- 
tioner," or,  "  duly  qualified  dental  practitioner,"  or  any  other 
words  importing  a  person  recognized  by  law  as  a  dental 
practitioner  or  member  of  the  dental  profession,  when  used 
in  any  Act  of  the  Legislature,  or  legal  or  public  document, 
shall  be  construed  to  mean  a  person  registered  under  this 
chapter. 

Sec  27.  If  any  person  not  registered  or  licensed  under 
the  provisions  of  this  chapter  practices  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery  for  hire,  gain,  or  hope  of  reward  ;  or  willfully  or 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  417 

falsely  pretends  to  be  a  practitioner  of  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery ;  or  takes  or  uses  any  name,  title,  addition  or  description, 
implying,  or  calculated  to  lead  people  to  infer  that  he  is 
registered  under  this  chapter  ;  or  professes,  by  public  adver- 
tisement, card,  circular,  sign,  or  otherwise,  to  practice  den- 
tistry or  dental  surgery  ;  or  to  give  advice  therein,  or  in  any 
wise  to  lead  people  to  infer  that  he  is  qualified  to  practice 
dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this  Province,  he  shall  forfeit 
and  pay  the  sum  of  twenty  (20)  dollars  for  each  day  that  he 
so  practices,  or  leads  people  to  infer  that  he  is  practicing. 

Sec.  28.  Any  sum  forfeited  under  the  next  preceding 
section  shall  be  recoverable,  with  costs,  and  may  be. sued  for 
and  recovered  in  the  same  manner  as  a  private  debt,  by  the 
Provincial  Dental  Board,  or  any  registered  dental  practitioner, 
in  any  of  the  courts  of  the  Province  having  jurisdiction  in 
actions  of  assumpsit  to  the  extent  of  eighty  (80)  dollars  and 
upwards;  and,  being  recovered,  shall  belong  to  the  board, 
for  the  use  thereof  under  this  chapter ;  provided,  that  when 
the  information  leading  to  such  recovery  shall  have  been 
given  by  any  person  unconnected  with  the  dental  profession, 
such  person  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  one-half  the  sum  re- 
covered. 

Sec  29.  Upon  the  trial  of  such  cause,  the  burden  of 
proof  as  to  the  license  or  right  of  the  defendant  to  practice 
dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  Nova  Scotia,  shall  be  upon  the 
defendant. 

Sec.  30.  If  the  Registrar  makes  or  causes  to  be  made,  any 
willful  falsification  in  any  matters  relating  to  the  register,  he 
shall  forfeit  a  sum  of  not  less  than  one  hundred  (100)  dollars, 
to  be  recovered  as  hereinbefore  provided  as  to  persons  prac- 
ticing illegally. 

Sec  31.  If  any  person  shall  willfully  procure  or  attempt 
to  procure  himself  to  be  registered  under  this  chapter  by 
making  or  producing,  or  causing  to  be  made  or  produced,  any 
false  or  fraudulent  representation  or  declaration,  either  verb- 
ally or  in  writing,  any  such  person  so  doing,  and  any  person 
knowingly  aiding  and  assisting  him  therein,  shall  forfeit  and 


418  APPENDIX. 

pay  a  sum  of  not  less  than  one  hundred  (100)  dollars,  to  be 
recovered  as  a  private  debt  as  hereinbefore  provided. 

Sec.  32.  No  suit  shall  be  commenced  under  this  chapter 
after  one  year  from  the  date  of  the  offense  or  cause  of  action. 

Sec  33.  Nothing  in  this  chapter  shall  prevent  any  person 
from  giving  necessary  aid  to  any  one  in  urgent  need  of  it ; 
-provided,  that  such  aid  or  attendance  is  not  given  for  hire  or 
gain,  nor  the  giving  of  it  made  a  business  or  way  of  gaining 
a  livelihood  by  such  person. 

Sec.  34.  The  Provincial  Dental  Board  shall  hold  a  meet- 
ing every  year,  at  which  annual  meeting  they  shall  have 
power  to  appoint  examiners,  fix  time  of  examinations,  and 
transact  all  business  arising  out  of  this  chapter,  and  any  such 
meeting  may  be  continued  by  adjournment  from  day  to  day 
until  the  business  before  the  board  be  finished  ;  but  no  such 
meeting  shall  be  so  continued  by  adjournment  beyond  the 
Saturday  of  the  week  in  which  the  sitting  commences.  The 
board  shall  also  have  power,  and  it  shall  be  their  duty,  to 
hold  such  other  meetings  as  may  be  necessary,  at  which  meet- 
ings they  shall  have  the  powers  and  duties  herein  conferred 
and  imposed  upon  the  board  at  the  annual  meeting. 

Sec  35.  The  privileges  and  exemptions  conferred  upon 
physicians  and  surgeons  by  the  laws  of  this  Province  are 
hereby  granted  to  licensed  dentists. 

This  Act  to  come  in  force  on  the  day  of  its  sanction. 

SCHEDULE  "  A." 
Name.         Age.  Residence.  Qualification. 

A.  B.       22  Halifax.  D.D.S.,Univ.  of  Penm 

CD.       30       Windsor,  Hants  Co.       D.M.D.,Harv'd  Univ. 

SCHEDULE    "B." 

Standard  of  matriculation  or  preliminary  examination 
established  under  this  chapter : 

Compulsory. — English  language,  including  grammar, 
composition  and  writing,  and  decimal  fractions  and  the 
extraction  of  the  square  root.  Algebra,  to  the  end  of 
simple  equations.     Geometry,  first  three  books  of  Euclid. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  4191 

Latin,  one  book  translation  and  grammar.     Elementary  me- 
chanics of  solids  and  fluids. 

And  one  of  the  following  optional  subjects :  History  of 
England,  with  questions  in  modern  geography,  French  trans- 
lation, one  Greek  book,  History  of  Nova  Scotia,  History  of 
the  Dominion  of  Canada. 


ONTAKIO. 

Her  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Legisla- 
tive Assembly  of  the  Province  of  Ontario,  enacts,  as  follows: 

Section  1. — "  The  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons  of 
Ontario,"  incorporated  under  the  Act  passed  in  the  thirty- 
first  year  of  her  Majesty's  reign,  and  chaptered  thirty-seven, 
is  continued,  and  every  person  who  holds  a  valid  and  unfor- 
feited  certificate  of  license  to  practice  dentistry,  which  has 
been  granted  to  him  by  any  Board  of  Directors,  duly  elected 
under  the  said  Act,  or  this  Act,  shall  be  a  member  of  the  said 
corporation.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  1.) 

Sec.  2.  The  Board  of  Directors  of  said  college  shall  con- 
sist of  seven  members,  who  shall  hold  office  for  two  years, 
and  of  whom  any  four  shall  form  a  quorum. 

2.  Any  member  may  at  any  time  resign  by  letter  di- 
rected to  the  Secretary,  and  in  the  event  of  such  resignation,, 
or  a  vacancy  occurring  by  death  or  otherwise,  the  remaining 
members  of  the  board  shall  elect  some  fit  and  proper  person 
from  among  the  licentiates  to  supply  such  vacancy.  (31  Y.r 
c.  37,  s.  3  ;  35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  1.) 

Sec.  3.  Elections  of  the  Board  of  Directors  shall  be  held 
on  the  third  Tuesday  in  July,  in  the  city  of  Toronto,  in  every 
second  year ;  and  the  persons  qualified  to  vote  at  any  such 
election  shall  be  such  persons  as  have  obtained  certificates  of 
license  under  the  provisions  of  the  Acts  respecting  dentistry 
heretofore  in  force,  or  who  hereafter  obtain  certificates  of  li- 
cense under  the  provisions  of  this  Act.     (35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  3.) 

Sec  4.  Every  board  shall  hold  its  first  meeting  on  the 
day  following  the  election  of  such  board,  at  noon,  at  such 


420  APPENDIX. 

place  in  the  city  of  Toronto  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be 
fixed  by  the  board.     (35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  2.) 

Sec.  5.  The  said  board  shall,  at  its  first  meeting,  elect  from 
among  its  members  a  President,  Treasurer,  Secretary,  and 
Registrar,  and  such  other  officers  as  may  be  necessary  to  the 
working  of  this  Act  and  the  rules  and  regulations  of  said 
board ;  and  the  said  board  shall,  from  time  to  time,  in  the 
event  of  the  President  being  absent,  from  any  cause  whatever, 
elect  from  among  its  members,  a  person  to  preside  at  its  meet- 
ings, who  shall  have  the  same  powers  and  exercise  the  same 
functions  as  the  President.     (31  V.,  c.  37,  s.  7.) 

Sec.  6.  There  shall  be  allowed  and  paid  to  each  of  the 
members  of  the  board  such  fees  for  attendance  (in  no  case  to 
exceed  five  dollars  per  day)  and  such  reasonable  traveling  ex- 
penses as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  allowed  by  the  board. 
(31  V.,  c.  37,  s.  8.) 

Sec  7.  All  moneys  forming  part  of  the  fund  of  said 
board  shall  be  paid  to  the  Treasurer,  and  shall  be  applied  to 
the  carrying  of  this  Act  into  execution.     (31  V.,  c.  37,  s.  9.) 

Sec  8.  The  said  board  shall  have  power  and  authority 
to  make  arrangements  for  the  establishment  of  a  School  of 
Dentistry  in  the  city  of  Toronto.     (35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  10.) 

Sec.  9.  The  said  board  shall  have  power  and  authority 
to  appoint  one  or  more  examiners  for  the  matriculation  or 
preliminary  examination  of  all  students  entering  the  profes- 
sion. Such  examination  shall  be  passed  prior  to  entering  into 
articles  of  indenture  with  a  licentiate  of  dentistry,  and  the 
commencement  of  study  shall  date  from  the  signing  of  said 
articles.     (35  V.,  c  34,  s.  4.) 

Sec  1 0.  The  said  board  shall  also  have  power  and  author- 
ity to  fix  and  determine,  from  time  to  time,  a  curriculum  of 
studies  to  be  pursued  by  students,  and  to  fix  and  determine 
the  period  for  which  every  student  shall  be  articled,  and  em- 
ployed under  some  duly  licensed  practitioner,  and  the  exam- 
ination necessary  to  be  passed  before  said  board,  and  the 
fees  to  be  paid  into  the  hands  of  the  Treasurer  of  said  board, 
before  receiving  a  certificate  of  license  to  practice  the  profes- 
sion of  dentistry.     (35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  4.) 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  421 

Sec.  11.  The  Board  of  Directors  of  said  college  shall 
also  have  authority  to  examine  candidates  and  grant  certifi- 
cates of  license  to  practice  dental  surgery  in  this  Province. 
(31  V.,  c.  37,  ss.  Land  2.) 

Sec  12.  With  the  view  to  encourage  the  attainment  of 
a  higher  standard  of  education  among  licentiates  of  the  said 
college,  the  board  may  by  by-law  provide  that  any  licentiate 
of  dentistry,  being  a  member  of  said  college  of  not  less  than 
five  years'  standing,  shall  receive  the  title  of  "  Master  of 
Dental  Surgery  "  of  said  college,  upon  passing  such  exami- 
nations and  complying  with  such  regulations  as  the  said 
Board  of  Directors  may,  from  time  to  time,  prescribe.  (40  V., 
c.  23,  s.  10.) 

Sec.  13.  The  said  board  shall,  from  time  to  time,  make 
such  rules  and  regulations  and  by-laws  as  may  be  necessary 
for  the  proper  and  better  guidance,  government  and  regula- 
tion of  the  said  board,  and  said  profession  of  dentistry,  and  the 
carrying  out  of  this  Act ;  which  said  rules,  regulations  and 
by-laws  shall  be  published  for  two  consecutive  weeks  in  the 
Ontario  Gazette. 

2.  Any  or  all  of  such  rules,  regulations  and  by-laws  shall 
be  liable  to  be  cancelled  and  annulled  by  order  of  the  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor of  this  Province.  (31 V.,  c.  37,  s.  13  ;  35  V., 
c.  34,  s.  7.) 

Sec  14.  All  persons  being  British  subjects,  by  birth  or 
naturalization,  who  were  engaged  on  the  fourth  day  of  March, 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  sixty-eight,  in  the  practice 
of  the  profession  of  dentistry,  or  who,  not  having  been  resi- 
dents of  Ontario,  have  had  three  years'  experience  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry,  shall  be  entitled  to  a  certificate  of  "  Li- 
centiate of  Dental  Surgery,"  upon  their  furnishing  to  the  said 
board  satisfactory  proof  of  their  having  been  so  engaged,  and 
upon  passing  the  required  examination,  and  upon  payment  of 
the  fees  authorized  and  fixed  by  the  said  board  (for  the  pay- 
ment of  which  the  Treasurer's  receipt  shall  be  sufficient  evi- 
dence), and  all  persons  being  British  subjects,  by  birth  or 
naturalization,  who  were  constantly  engaged  for  five  years 
and  upwards  in  established  office  practice,  next  preceding  the 


422  APPENDIX. 

s;iid  fourth  day  of  March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
sixty-eight,  in  the  practice  of  the  profession  of  dentistry  in 
the  Province  of  Ontario,  shall,  upon  such  proof  us  aforesaid, 
and  upon  the  payment  of  such  fees  as  aforesaid,  be  entitled 
to  such  certificate  without  passing  any  examination.  (31  V., 
<j.  37,  s.  12 ;  35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  6.) 

Sec.  15.  The  said  board  shall  hold  one  meeting  in  each 
and  ever  year  in  the  city  of  Toronto,  at  such  place  as  may, 
from  time  to  time,  be  fixed  by  the  board,  for  the  purpose  of 
examining  students,  granting  certificates  of  license,  and  doing 
such  other  business  as  may  properly  come  before  them.  Such 
meeting  shall  be  held  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  March,  and 
shall  continue  from  day  to  day  until  the  business  before  the 
board  is  finished ;  but  no  such  meeting  shall  continue  for 
more  than  one  week.     (35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  5.) 

Sec.  16.  Every  person  desirous  of  being  examined  by 
the  said  board  touching  his  qualifications  for  the  practice  of 
the  profession  of  dentistry,  shall,  at  least  one  month  before 
the  sitting  of  said  board,  pay  into  the  hands  of  the  Treasurer 
the  required  fees,  and  enclose  and  deliver  to  the  Secretary 
the  Treasurer's  receipt  for. the  same,  together  with  satisfac- 
tory evidence  of  his  apprenticeship,  integrity,  and  good 
morals ;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  to  hold  a  sitting 
for  the  purpose  hereinbefore  mentioned  on  the  first  Tuesday  in 
March  next  ensuing  the  said  payment  and  delivery.  (31  V., 
c.  37,  s.  14 ;  35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  8.) 

Sec  17.  If  the  board  is  satisfied  by  the  examination  that 
the  person  is  duly  qualified  to  practice  the  profession  of  den- 
tistry, and  is  further  satisfied  that  he  is  a  person  of  integrity 
and  good  moral  character,  it  shall  grant  him  a  certificate  of 
license  subject  to  such  rules,  regulations  and  by-laws ;  and 
the  title  of  "  Licentiate  of  Dental  Surgery,"  which  certificate 
and  title  shall  entitle  him  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  of 
this  Act.     (31  V.,  c.  37,  s.  15  ;  35  V.,  c.  34,  s.  9.) 

Sec  18.  Every  certificate  of  license  shall  be  sealed  with 
the  corporate  seal  of  the  college  and  signed  by  the  President 
and  Secretary  of  said  board ;  and  the  production  of  such 
certificate   of  license  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence,  in  all 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  423 

courts  of  law  and  upon  all  proceedings  of  whatever  kind,  .of 
its  execution  and  contents.     (31  V.,  c.  37,  s.  16.) 

Sec  19.  The  Secretary  of  the  said  board  shall,  on  or  be- 
fore the  fifteenth  day  of  January,  in  each  and  every  year, 
enclose  to  the  Provincial  Secretary  a  certified  list  of  the 
names  of  all  persons  to  whom  certificates  of  license  have  been 
granted  during  the  next  preceding  year.     (31  V.,c.  37,  s.  17.) 

Sec  20.  Xo  person  who  is  not  a  member  of  the  said 
The  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons  of  Ontario,  shall  prac- 
tice the  profession  of  dentistry  for  hire,  gain,  or  hope  of  re- 
ward, or  pretend  to  hold,  or  take,  or  use  any  name,  title, 
addition,  or  description  implying  that  he  holds  a  certificate 
of  license  to  practice  dentistry,  or  that  he  is  a  member  of  the 
said  The  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons  of  Ontario,  or 
shall  falsely  represent,  or  use  any  title  representing,  that  he 
is  a  graduate  of  any  dental  college. 

2.  Every  person  who  contravenes  any  of  the  provisions 
of  this  section,  shall,  for  each  such  offense,  incur  a  penalty 
of  twenty  dollars.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  2.) 

Sec.  21.  Every  penalty  imposed  by  this  Act  may  be 
recovered,  with  full  cost  of  prosecution,  on  summary  convic- 
tion before  any  one  or  more  of  Her  Majesty's  Justices  of  the 
Peace  for  the  county  in  which  the  offense  is  committed.  (40 
V.,  c.  23,  s.  3.) 

Sec  22.  Except  where  it  is  herein  otherwise  provided, 
the  procedure  upon  any  such  prosecution  shall  be  that  pre- 
scribed by  The  Act  Respecting  Summary  Convictions  before 
Justices  of  the  Peace.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  4.) 

Sec  23.  The  penalty  and  costs  imposed  upon  any  such 
convictions  shall  be  forthwith  paid  over  to  the  convicting  Jus- 
tice, and  the  penalty  shall  be  by  him  paid  over  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  said  The  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons  of 
Ontario ;  and  in  case  the  said  penalty  and  costs  are  not  paid 
forthwith,  the  said  Justice  may  issue  his  warrant  to  commit 
the  defendant  to  the  common  gaol  of  the  county,  there  to 
be  imprisoned  for  any  term  not  exceeding  one  month,  unless 
the  penalty  and  costs  are  sooner  paid.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  5.) 

8e<5.  24.  The  penalty  imposed  by  the  twentieth  section 


4:24  APPENDIX. 

of  this  Act  may  be  recovered  with  full  costs  of  suit  in  the 
name  of  The  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons  of  Ontario, 
in  the  proper  Division  Court.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  6.) 

Sec.  25.  On  any  prosecution  or  suit  under  this  Act,  the 
burden  of  proof  that  the  defendant  is  entitled  to  practice  the 
profession  of  dentistry  as  aforesaid,  or  to  use  the  title  assumed 
by  him,  or  that  he  is  a  graduate  of  the  dental  college  of  which 
he  professes  to  be  a  graduate  (as  the  case  may  be),  shall  be 
upon  the  defendant.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  7.) 

Sec.  26.  No  person  who  contravenes  any  of  the  provi- 
sions of  the  twentieth  section  of  this  Act,  shall  be  entitled  to 
sue  or  recover  in  any  Court  of  Law  or  Equity  for  any  work 
done  or  materials  provided  by  him,  in  the  ordinary  and  cus- 
tomary work  of  a  dentist.     (40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  8.) 

Sec  27.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  affect  or  interfere 
with  the  rights  and  privileges  conferred  upon  legally-quali- 
fied medical  practitioners  by  the  Acts  relating  to  the  prac- 
tice of  medicine  and  surgery  in  this  Province.  (31  V.,  c.  37, 
s.  19  ;  40  V.,  c.  23,  s.  2.     See  Rev.  Stat. :  c.  142,  s.  55.) 


ONTARIO. 

The  dental  profession  of  the  Province  of  Ontario  was 
incorporated  by  Act  of  the  Legislature  in  the  year  1875, 
under  the  corporate  title  of  The  Royal  College  of  Dental 
Surgeons  of  Ontario.  By  the  provisions  of  the  Act,  the 
whole  control  of  the  profession  is  placed  in  the  hands  of  a 
Board  of  Directors  and  Examiners,  seven  in  number,  who 
are  elected  biennially  by  the  members  of  the  college.  This 
board  fixes  the  matriculation,  examination,  term  of  pupilage, 
curriculum  of  studies,  primary  and  final  examinations,  fees,, 
etc.  The  present  matriculation  is  about  equivalent  to  pass 
matriculation  in  arts  in  the  universities,  excepting  that 
classics  are  not  obligatory.  The  term  of  pupilage  is  two 
years  and  a  half,  under  sealed  indentures  with  a  duly  quali- 
fied dental  practitioner. 

Attendance  at  two  sessions  of  the  dental  school,  estab- 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  425 

lished  by  the  college,  is  required.  A  primary  examination 
being  passed  at  the  end  of  the  first  session,  and  a  final  at  the 
close  of  the  second. 

Successful  candidates  are  admitted  as  members  of  the 
Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons,  and  receive  the  title  of 
Licentiate  of  Dental  Surgery  (L.  D.  S.). 

None  but  members  of  the  college  are  permitted  to  prac- 
tice dentistry,  and  heavy  penalties  are  incurred  by  violation 
of  the  law.  Foreign  dentists  (and  under  this  head  are  in- 
cluded those  from  the  other  provinces  of  the  Dominion  of 
Canada),  who  have  had  three  years'  practice  exclusive  of 
pupilage,  or  who  have  been  engaged  three  years  in  the  study 
of  dentistry,  and  have  proceeded  regularly  to  graduation  in 
a  reputable  dental  college,  are  admitted  to  examination  for 
membership  in  the  college,  and  the  title  of  L.  D.  S.,  on 
matriculation  and  payment  of  the  regular  examination  fee. 
Registered  physicians  of  the  Province  of  Ontario  are  ad- 
mitted members  on  payment  of  the  fees  and  passing  the  ex- 
aminations in  the  purely  dental  subjects.  The  Board  of 
Directors  established  a  school  of  dentistry  in  the  city  of 
Toronto  in  the  year  1875. 


PKIXCE  EDWARD  ISLAND. 


An  Act  Regulating  the  Practice  of  Dentistry  and  Dental  Sur- 
gery in  the  Province  of  Prince  Edward  Island,  which  was 
Assented  to  July  15th,  1891. 

"Whereas,  it  is  desirable  to  regulate  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  the  Province  of  Prince  Edward  Island  ; 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor, 
Council  and  Assembly,  as  folloivs  :  This  Act  may  be  cited  as 
"  The  Prince  Edward  Island  Dental  Act." 

Sec  2.  That  no  person  shall  practice  the  profession  of 
dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  Province  of  Prince  Edward 
Island  without  having  first  received  a  certificate,  as  herein- 
after provided,  entitling  him  to  practice  dentistry  or  dental 
surgery. 


426  APPENDIX. 

Sec.  3.  That  such  certificate  shall  be  issued  by  the  Pro- 
vincial Secretary,  upon  production  to  him  of  a  diploma  of 
graduation  in  dental  surgery  from  the  faculty  of  any  Cana- 
dian dental  college,  or  the  faculty  of  any  Canadian  university 
having  a  special  dental  department,  or  from  any  such  insti- 
tution duly  authorized  by  the  laws  of  Great  Britain  or  any 
of  her  dependencies,  or  from  any  dental  college  in  the  United 
States  of  America  recognized  by  the  National  Board  of  Den- 
tal Examiners  of  the  said  United  States  of  America,  or  from 
any  recognized  dental  institution  of  any  other  foreign  coun- 
try, which  required,  at  the  time  of  issue  of  such  diploma  or 
license,  attendance  at  a  regular  course  of  lectures,  and  an  ap- 
prenticeship of  not  less  than  two  years  ;  or  a  person  who  has 
been  in  regular  practice  in  Prince  Edward  Island  as  a  dentist 
or  dental  surgeon  for  a  period  of  six  months  immediately 
preceding  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  persons  claiming  to  be  entitled  to  the  certificate  required 
bv  this  section,  to  produce  to  the  said  Provincial  Secretary 
evidence,  satisfactory  to  him,  of  his  being  entitled  thereto. 

Sec.  4.  And  it  is  further  enacted  that,  notwithstanding 
anvthing  herein  contained,  such  certificate  as  aforesaid  may 
be  issued  to  any  dental  student  who,  at  the  time  of  the  pass- 
in°-  of  this  Act,  was  actually  apprenticed  to  any  surgeon  den- 
tist in  this  Province,  and  who  shall  actually,  at  the  time  of 
applying  for  such  certificate,  have  served  apprenticeship  of  at 
least  two  years,  and  who  shall  also  produce  a  certificate  to 
the  Provincial  Secretary  from  such  surgeon  dentist,  testify- 
ing to  the  effect  that  the  applicant  was  duly  apprenticed  be- 
fore the  passing  of  this  Act  for  at  least  one  month,  and  has, 
at  the  time  of  application,  completed  an  apprenticeship  of  at 
least  two  years ;  provided  always,  that  nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  be  construed  to  require  physicians,  surgeons,  or 
others,  to  take  out  such  certificate  for  the  purpose  of  quali- 
fying them  to  extract  teeth. 

Sec.  5.  That,  before  any  such  certificate  is  granted,  the 
applicant  shall  pay  the  Provincial  Secretary  the  sum  of  five 
dollars. 

Sec.  6.  After  three  months  from  the  passing  of  this  Act, 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  427 

anj'  person  not  holding  a  valid  certificate  issued  by  the  said 
Provincial  Secretary  as  aforesaid,  who  practices  dentistry  or 
dental  surgery,  except  extracting  teeth,  shall  be  guilty  of  an 
infraction  of  this  Act,  and  shall  be  liable,  upon  summary 
conviction  before  the  Stipendiary  Magistrate  of  the  city  of 
Charlottetown,  or  the  Stipendiary  Magistrate  of  the  town  of 
Summerside,or  before  any  two  Justices  of  the  Peace,  for  the 
county  in  which  the  offender  resides,  to  a  fine  of  not  less 
than  five  dollars,  nor  more  than  twenty-five  dollars,  besides 
costs  of  suit,  to  be  levied  by  distress  of  the  defendant's  goods 
and  chattels,  or,  in  default  thereof,  to  be  imprisoned  for  a 
period  not  exceeding  one  month. 

Sec.  7.  That  no  person  who  has  not  received  the  certifi- 
cate required  by  this  Act  shall  recover  in  any  court  of  law 
any  fees  or  money  for  any  professional  services  or  operation 
performed  by  him,  nor  for  any  materials  provided  by  him 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery. 

Sec.  8.  That  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to 
prevent  surgeons  or  physicians  from  temporarily  filling  teeth, 
or  otherwise  attending  to  them,  for  the  prevention  or  cure 
of  toothache. 


QUEBEC. 
DENTAL    ACT. 

An  Act  to  Re-enact  and  Amend  the  Law  Respecting  Dentists. 

"Whereas,  it  is  expedient  to  re-enact  the  law  concerning 
dentists  by  amending  it  so  as  to  extend  its  provisions  con- 
cerning the  practice  of  the  profession,  the  examination  of 
candidates,  and  the  penalties,  and  to  provide  for  the  protec- 
tion of  the  profession  and  the  public  ;  therefore,  Her  Majesty, 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Legislature  of 
Quebec,  enacts,  as  follows : 

1.  Section  fifth  of  chapter  fourth  of  title  tenth  of  the 
Revised  Statutes  of  the  Province  of  Quebec  is  replaced  by 
the  following : 


428  APPENDIX. 

SECTION  V.— DENTISTS. 
§  1.    CORPORATION  OF  DENTISTS. 

I.  Constitution  of  the  Corporation  and  its  Powers. 

"  4053.  All  persons  residing  within  the  Province  author- 
ized by  law  to  practice  the  profession  of  dentist  therein,  and 
who  have  obtained  a  certificate  as  a  licensed  surgeon  dentist 
in  this  Province,  and  who  are  registered  as  such  in  virtue  of 
this  section,  are  incorporated  under  the  appellation  of  the 
'  Dental  Association  of  the  Province  of  Quebec,'  having  a 
common  seal,  with  power  to  change,  amend,  cancel  or  renew 
the  same. 

2.  Under  such  name,  the  corporation  shall  be  invested 
with  all  the  powers  conferred  upon  civil  corporations  under 
the  laws  of  the  country,  but  shall  be  precluded  from  acquir- 
ing any  real  estate  of  over  ten  thousand  dollars  in  value." 

II.  Services  upon  the  Corporation. 

"  4054.  All  actions  against  the  corporation  shall  be 
served  in  the  ordinary  form  upon  the  Secretary  of  the  Board 
of  Examiners  personally  or  at  his  professional  office ;  and  all 
other  services,  which  should  be  made  upon  the  parties  accord- 
ing to  the  laws  of  procedure  and  the  rules  of  practice,  shall 
likewise  be  made  in  the  same  manner. 

§  2.    MANAGEMENT. 

I.  Board  Entrusted  Therewith  and  Composition  Thereof. 
"  4055.  The  Board  of  Examiners  is  charged  with  the 
management  of  the  business  of  the  Association. 

2.  The  Board  is  composed  of  seven  members  of  the 
Association  elected  at  a  general  meeting  held  for  that  pur- 
pose every  third  year,  on  the  third  Wednesday  of  September. 

3.  The  election  shall  be  by  ballot  by  the  members 
qualified  to  vote  and  present  at  the  said  meeting. 

4.  No  persons  shall  vote  at  such  election  unless  they 
fulfill  all  the  following  conditions,  namely : 

'  1.  Are  members  of  the  Association ; 
'  2.  Are  regularly  registered  as  such  ; 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  429 

'  3.  Are,  at  the  time,  authorized  to  practice  the  profes- 
sion of  a  dentist ; 

'  4.  Are  present  at  the  said  election,  and  qualified  to 
attend  the  same  and  take  part  in  its  proceedings  ; 

'  5.  Have  paid  into  the  hands  of  the  Treasurer  of  the 
said  Association  all  dues  imposed  in  virtue  of  this  section  as 
well  as  under  any  other  Act.' 

5.  The  Examiners  elected  shall  remain  in  office  during 
three  years. 

6.  The  members  of  the  board  so  elected  shall  appoint, 
from  among  their  number,  a  President,  a  Secretary,  a  Treas- 
urer, a  Registrar,  and  such  other  officers  as  to  them  may  seem 
desirable. 

Such  officers  remain  in  office  until  a  new  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers shall  have  been  appointed  at  a  subsequent  election. 

7.  If,  for  any  cause  whatsoever,  the  election  could  not 
be  held  on  the  day  prescribed,  then  it  may  be  held  at  any 
adjourned  meeting,  provided  that  at  the  meeting  so  adjourned 
there  shall  be  present  at  least  ten  members  qualified  to  vote. 

In  case  there  should  be  not  ten  such  members  present, 
the  Secretary  shall  convene  another  meeting,  by  thirty  days' 
notice  in  the  Quebec  Official  Gazette,  giving  the  place,  date, 
and  hour  of  the  said  meeting. 

8.  The  next  meeting  for  the  election  of  members  of 
the  Board  shall  be  held  on  the  third  Wednesday  of  Septem- 
ber, one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-nine. 

For  that  purpose,  the  Secretary  actually  in  office  shall 

give  thirty  days'  notice  at   least  in  the  Quebec   Official 

Gazette  of  the  place,  date  and  hour  when  such  meeting  will 

be  held. 

II.  Fowers  of  the  Board. 

9.  It  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Board  of  Examiners  to 
enact  rules  and  regulations,  not  inconsistent  with  the  pro- 
visions of  this  section,  respecting  the  honor,  the  dignity  and 
the  discipline  of  the  members  of  the  Association,  the  ex- 
aminations for  admission  to  the  practice  of  dentistry,  and 
generally  for  all  matters  and  things  in  connection  with  the 
practice  of  dentistry. 


430  APPENDIX. 

§3.    CONTRIBUTIONS. 

"  4056.  Every  member  of  the  Association  shall  pay  into 
the  hands  of  the  Treasurer  of  the  Association,  on  or  before 
the  third  day  of  September,  in  every  year,  a  contribution  of 
two  dollars. 

"  4057.  In  addition  to  his  inability  to  vote  as  stated  in 
article  4055,  any  member  of  the  Association  neglecting  to 
pay  his  contribution,  after  a  thirty  days'  notice  given  to  him 
by  registered  letter  by  the  Treasurer,  may  be  prosecuted  for 
recovery  of  the  said  contribution  and  arrears  before  a  civil 
court  of  justice  of  competent  jurisdiction. 

§  4.    CANDIDATES   FOR   STUDY   AND    PRACTICE. 

I.  Candidates  for  Study. 
"  4058.  Any  person  conforming  to  the  by-laws  of  the 
Association  and  the  provisions  of  this  section,  may  study  the 
art  of  dentistry  without  any  previous  examination  for  the 
same. 

2.  Every  student  of  dental  surgery  shall  enter  into  a  nota- 
rial indenture  with  a  licensed  surgeon-dentist  in  this  Province, 
authorized  to  practice  the  said  profession  therein,  and  shall 
deliver  into  the  hands  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers a  copy  of  the  said  indenture. 

These  two  conditions  being  complied  with,  the  said  per- 
son's name  shall  be  registered  by  the  Secretary,  and  from 
that  time  only  shall  his  time  of  study  be  computed. 

3.  The  time  of  study  in  the  office  of  a  licensed  surgeon- 
dentist  is  four  years. 

During  that  time  the  student  is  obliged  to  follow  at  least 
one  course  of  lectures  in  an  authorized  college  of  dental  sur- 
gery, or  a  course  of  anatomy,  of  physiology  and  chemistry 
in  any  university  of  medicine  in  this  Province. 

II.  Candidates  for  Practice. 
"4059.  To  be  admitted  to  examination  for  admission 
to  practice  as  a  surgeon-dentist,  a  student  must  previously 
have  gone  through  the  examinations  in  French,  English, 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  431 

Latin,  history,  geography,  arithmetic  and  geometry,  pre- 
scribed by  any  medical  college  in  this  Province  for  admission 
to  study,  and  obtained  a  certificate  establishing  his  having 
successfully  passed  the  same. 

Such  examinations  are  passed  before  the  examiner  of  the 
college  then  in  office  ;  and  the  student  must  give  a  written 
notice  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Association  at  least  fifteen  days 
previously  to  his  intention  to  undergo  such  examination. 

Any  student  regularly  registered  and  under  notarial  in- 
denture may,  at  any  time  during  his  clerkship,  pass  such  ex- 
aminations, provided  it  be  at  least  thirty  days  before  he  gives 
notice  of  his  intention  to  be  examined  for  the  practice  of  the 
profession. 

2.  By  complying  with  the  forms  prescribed  by  the  by- 
laws of  the  Association,  and  filing  a  certificate  of  such  college 
or  university  to  the  effect  that  he  has  there  followed  the 
course  mentioned  in  the  preceding  article,  he  shall  acquire  the 
right  of  being  admitted  to  examination  for  the  practice  of 
dental  surgery. 

If  successful  in  his  examination,  he  shall  be  entitled  to 
be  admitted  as  a  licensed  surgeon-dentist. 

"  4060.  Any  registered  and  indentured  student  holding 
a  diploma  from  a  college  of  dental  surgery,  acknowledged  by 
the  Association,  shall,  after  three  years  of  clerkship,  including 
the  time  passed  in  such  college,  by  complying  with  the  pro- 
visions of  this  section  and  the  formalities  aforesaid,  and  by 
paying  the  fees  fixed  upon  by  the  Board  of  Examiners,  be 
entitled  to  be  admitted  to  examination  for  the  practice  of 
dental  surgery. 

If  successful  in  his  examination,  he  shall  be  entitled  to 
a  license  of  surgeon-dentist. 

§  5.  EXAMINATIONS  AND  EXAMINERS. 

"4061.  The  examiners  shall  meet  for  the  examination  of 
candidates  at  the  time  prescribed  by  the  by-laws  of  the  Asso- 
ciation. 

At  such  meeting  they  determine  the  locality  in  this 


432  APPENDIX. 

Province,  and  the  date  and  hour  when  the  next  meeting  shall 
be  held  for  the  said  purposes. 

2.  The  Secretary  shall  give  to  each  member  of  the  board 
notice  of  the  said  meeting,  by  registered  letter,  through  the 
post-office,  thirty  days  at  least  before  said  meeting. 

If  the  locality,  date  and  hour  of  the  said  next  meeting 
have  not  been  determined  upon,  the  said  meeting  shall  be 
held  at  the  time,  place,  date  and  hour  as  it  was  held  last  time. 

3.  The  examiners  shall  meet  as  often  as  they  may  deem 
fit,  upon  the  written  requisition  of  three  of  their  number. 

4.  Four  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be  a 
quorum. 

5.  The  President,  or  the  Chairman  elected  in  his  absence, 
in  addition  to  his  ordinary  vote,  shall  have  a  casting  vote. 

6.  Each  member  of  the  board  shall  be  entitled,  in  addi- 
tion to  his  traveling  expenses,  for  each  sitting  attended  by 
him,  to  a  fee  to  be  determined  upon  by  the  board,  and  which 
shall  not  exceed  five  dollars. 

7.  In  the  event  of  the  death  or  resignation  of  a  member 
of  the  board,  or  of  any  vacancy  for  any  cause  whatever,  the 
other  members  shall  immediately  elect  a  person  qualified  for 
such  office. 

The  new  member  shall  replace  the  former  one  for  the  rest 
of  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected. 

8.  There  shall  be  a  vacancy  in  the  case  of  the  absence  of 
a  member  from  two  sittings  of  the  board. 

§  6.    COMPLAINTS  BEFORE  THE  BOARD  FOR  BREACHES  OF  DISCIPLINE. 

I.  Summons  of  the  Accused. 

"  4062.  The  Board  of  Examiners,  upon  complaint  in  writ- 
ing, and  under  oath  taken  before  the  Secretary  of  the  said  As- 
sociation, may  cause  to  appear  before  them  a  member  of  the 
said  Association  charged  with  violation  of  the  by-laws,  or  with 
any  act  derogatory  to  the  honor  or  the  dignity  of  the  profes- 
sion, or  with  following  or  practicing  a  trade  or  industry  in- 
consistent with  the  said  profession. 


DENTAL    JUKISPRUDENCE.  433 

II.  Preliminary  Proceedings  upon  the  Complaint. 

2.  The  complaint  shall  state  summarily  the  time,  place, 
•circumstances,  and  nature  of  the  offense  complained  of. 

3.  The  Secretary  shall  submit  the  said  complaint  imme- 
diately to  the  board,  and  the  latter  may,  by  registered  letter, 
call  before  them  both  the  complainant  and  defendant  for  a 
certain  fixed  day. 

4.  On  the  day  so  fixed,  the  board  may  hear  both  parties 
or  the  party  in  attendance,  and,  if  circumstances  allow  it,  may 
conciliate  and  pacify  the  parties. 

5.  The  board  may  grant  or  refuse  permission  to  the  com- 
plainant to  proceed  with  his  case,  or  to  the  defendant  to  file 
a  counter  complaint,  if  the  complainant  is  a  dentist  legally 
practicing  his  profession. 

In  each  case,  the  board  may  exact  from  the  party  author- 
ized to  prosecute  a  deposit,  the  amount  whereof  shall  be 
determined  by  them,  and  which  shall  be  made  with  the  Treas- 
urer as  a  guarantee  of  the  adverse  party's  costs.  The  board 
may,  according  to  circumstances,  dispense  with  any  deposit. 

6.  Upon  the  said  permission  to  proceed  being  granted 
and  the  making  of  a  deposit,  if  any  be  exacted,  the  accused 
shall  be,  by  a  notice  -signed  by  the  Secretary,  called  upon  to 
appear  before  the  Board  of  Examiners  at  the  place,  time  and 
hour  when  the  complaint  will  be  heard  and  considered. 

7.  A  true  copy  of  the  said  notice  and  complaint,  certi- 
fied by  the  Secretary,  shall  be  served  upon  the  accused  by  a 
bailiff  of  the  Superior  Court  in  the  ordinary  manner,  fifteen 
■days  at  least  before  that  fixed  upon  for  the  hearing  of  the 
complaint,  and  another  true  copy  of  the  complaint,  also  cer- 
tified, shall  be  annexed  to  the  original  of  the  said  notice,  on 
the  back  whereof  the  bailiff  shall  make  his  return,  under  his 
oath  of  office,  to  the  said  board,  in  the  ordinary  manner. 

8.  A  notice,  informing  the  complainant  of  the  place,  date 
and  hour  when  the  said  complainant  shall  be  heard,  shall  also 
be  served  upon  the  complainant,  and  a  return  made  of  said 
service, according  to  the  delays  and  in  the  manner  herein- 
above prescribed. 


434  APPENDIX. 

9.  The  bailiffs  fees  shall  be  similar  to  those  he  would  be 
entitled  to  in  a  cause  before  the  Superior  Court. 

10.  Any  bailiff  who  shall,  without  a  legitimate  reasony 
refuse  or  neglect  to  make  any  service  or  return  required  by 
this  section,  shall  be  liable  to  a  fine  of  not  less  than  forty  dol- 
lars, nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  recoverable  with  costs 
in  the  manner  prescribed  by  article  4067. 

III.  Appearance,   Trial,  and  Hearing. 

11.  The  accused  shall  be  held  to  appear  in  compliance- 
with  the  notice,  and  to  submit  immediately  in  reply  to  the 
complaint,  and  without  in  any  manner  delaying  the  hearing 
thereof,  a  defense  either  in  writing  or  verbally. 

12.  ~No  written  reply  to  the  said  defense  shall  be  admitted* 

13.  So  soon  as  the  accused  shall  have  submitted  his  de- 
fense, the  enquete  will  commence  and  will  be  continued  from 
day  to  day. 

14.  The  evidence  on  both  sides  being  completed,  the  par- 
ties shall  be  heard  upon  the  merits  of  the  complaint. 

15.  If  the  accused  makes  default  in  appearing,  or,  if  ap- 
pearing, he  fails  in  submitting  a  defense,  the  complainant 
shall  proceed  to  the  proof  of  the  facts  alleged  in  his  said  com- 
plaint. 

In  the  latter  case,  the  accused  shall  have  the  right  of 
cross-examining  the  complainant's  witnesses,  but  will  not  be 
allowed  to  produce  witnesses. 

16.  The  evidence  shall  be  taken  down  in  writing  by  an 
enquUe  clerk,  or  a  stenographer,  at  the  discretion  of  the 
Board  of  Examiners. 

17.  The  accused  may  cross-examine  the  complainant  on 
his  complaint,  and  give,  if  he  desires,  his  own  deposition* 
Both,  in  that  case,  shall  be  sworn. 

18.  The  accused  and  complainant  may  be  summoned  as 
witnesses,  and  treated  as  such  in  all  respects,  according  to 
the  provisions  of  this  section.  But  neither  they  nor  any 
other  witness  shall  be  bound  to  answer  questions,  if  they 
swear  that  their  answers  might  expose  them  to  a  criminal 
prosecution. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  435 

19.  The  Secretary  shall  summon  to  appear  before  the 
board,  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  the  Code  of  Civil  Pro- 
cedure, any  person  to  him  indicated  as  a  witness. 

20.  Every  person,  before  being  examined  as  a  witness  at 
the  enqnete,  shall  be  sworn  before  the  Secretary,  and  shall 
be  bound  to  answer  all  pertinent  questions  put  to  him. 

Any  person  who,  without  a  legitimate  excuse,  shall 
refuse  to  be  sworn  or  to  answer  such  questions,  shall  incur, 
for  each  such  refusal,  a  fine  not  exceeding  forty  dollars,  re- 
coverable with  costs  in  the  manner  hereinafter  prescribed  by 
article  4067. 

IV.  Judgment  Upon  the  Complainant. 

21.  After  hearing  the  evidence  on  both  sides,  the  board 
may  dismiss  the  complaint,  or,  according  to  the  gravity  of 
the  offense,  if  the  same  is  proved,  may  censure  or  reprimand 
the  accused,  or  deprive  him  of  the  privilege  of  attending  and 
taking  part  in  the  meetings  of  the  members  of  the  Associa- 
tion during  a  period  not  exceeding  three  years,  or  suspend 
him  from  the  practice  of  the  profession,  in  this  Province, 
during  the  space  of  one  year. 

22.  If  judgment  is  not  rendered  at  once,  notice  of  the 
day  when  it  will  be  rendered  shall  be  given  by  the  Secretary 
to  the  parties  concerned  two  days,  at  least,  beforehand. 

23.  The  members  of  the  board  deliberate  with  closed 
doors,  and  in  no  case  shall  their  dissent  be  communicated 
to  the  public,  under  the  penalties  imposed,  paragraph  21  of 
this  article. 

24.  All  decisions  of  the  board  shall  be  rendered  by  the 
majority  of  votes. 

When  the  final  decision  on  the  complaint  is  to  be  given, 
the  presence  of  all  the  members  who  have  heard  the  evidence 
is  not  necessary.  The  decision  may  be  given  in  the  presence 
of  the  majority  of  the  sitting  members. 

The  final  decision  shall  be  registered  in  the  minutes  of 
the  Association. 


436  APPENDIX. 

V.  Costs. 

25.  The  board  may  condemn  the  unsuccessful  party  to 
pay  such  costs  as  to  them  may  seem  fit,  or  divide  the  costs, 
and  may  condemn  him  in  addition  to  pay  the  successful 
party  a  certain  sum  as  a  compensation  for  all  personal  ex- 
penses incurred  in  connection  with  the  said  complaint 

VI.  Appeals. 

26.  Any  of  the  parties  feeling  aggrieved  by  reason  of 
the  final  decision  rendered  by  the  board,  may  appeal  to  a 
general  meeting  of  the  members  of  the  Association. 

No  such  decision  shall  be  invalidated, annulled  or  altered 
by  any  other  means  than  the  said  appeal,  not  even  by  certio- 
rari. 

27.  The  said  meeting  shall  be  convened  without  delay 
by  the  Secretary,  immediately  after  the  appeal  has  been  pro- 
duced, and  the  appellant  has  deposited  in  the  hands  of  the 
Treasurer  a  sum  of  one  hundred  dollars  as  a  guarantee  for 
the  payment  of  the  expenses  to  be  incurred  by  the  holding 
of  the  said  general  meeting,  and  of  the  expenses  of  the 
respondent. 

If  judgment  is  obtained  by  the  appellant  for  his  costs, 
the  expenses  of  the  general  meeting  shall  be  included  therein. 

In  lieu  of  the  said  deposit,  the  board  may  accept  security 
in  such  form  and  manner  as  to  them  may  seem  advisable. 

28.  For  that  purpose,  the  general  meeting  elects  a  Presi- 
dent and  a  Secretary. 

The  President,  in  addition  to  his  ordinary  vote,  has  a 
casting  vote. 

29.  Notice  of  the  appeal  before  the  meeting  shall  be 
given  within  the  fifteen  days  following  the  decision  of  the 
board,  and  filed  with  the  Secretary  within  the  thirty  days 
following  the  said  decision. 

The  filing  of  the  appeal,  accompanied  with  the  deposit 
or  security,  as  the  case  may  be,  shall  have  the  efiect  of  sus- 
pending the  sentence  of  the  board  until  the  general  meeting 
has  decided  upon  the  said  appeal. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  437 

30.  Notice  of  the  date,  hour  and  place  of  the  holding  of 
the  said  meeting  shall  be  addressed  by  the  Secretary  to  the 
appellant,  to  the  respondent,  and  to  all  members  of  the  Asso- 
ciation qualified  to  attend  the  same. 

The  said  meeting  shall  not  be  held  until  the  expiration 
of  the  ten  days  following  the  mailing  of  the  notice  at  the 
post-office. 

31.  The  Secretary  shall  transmit  the  record  of  the  com- 
plaint to  the  general  meeting. 

32.  The  decisions  of  the  general  meeting  shall  be  rendered 
by  a  majority  of  the  votes,  in  the  same  form  and  manner  as 
the  decisions  of  the  Board  of  Examiners,  provided  fifteen 
members  at  least  shall  be  present  at  the  same ;  and,  in  case  a 
smaller  number  of  members  should  attend,  provided  eight  of 
them  give  their  assent  to  the  decision  appealed  from. 

33.  Neither  the  appellant  nor  the  respondent  shall  be 
allowed  to  attend  the  said  meeting. 

34.  No  other  evidence  than  the  written  depositions 
taken  at  the  enquete  before  the  Board  of  Examiners  shall  be 
admitted  on  the  appeal ;  and  no  witnesses  shall  be  examined. 

35.  The  general  meeting  may  either  confirm  uncondi- 
tionally the  decision  of  the  board,  or  give  the  decision  which 
the  said  board  should  have  rendered,  and  adjudge,  both  as  to 
the  costs  in  the  first  instance  and  those  of  the  appeal,  in  the 
manner  as  to  the  said  meeting  may  seem  equitable. 

36.  The  decision  of  the  general  meeting,  as  well  on  the 
merits  of  the  appeal  as  upon  the  amount  of  costs  adjudged 
as  hereinabove,  shall  be  final,  and  shall  not  be  invalidated, 
annulled  or  revised  by  any  court  of  justice,  not  even  by 
certiorari. 

37.  The  decision  of  the  general  meeting,  together  with 
the  record,  shall  immediately  be  transmitted  by  its  Secretary 
to  the  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Examiners. 

In  all  cases,  the  said  decision  shall  be  registered  in  the 
register  of  the  Board  of  Examiners,  and  shall  be  executed 
as  if  it  had  been  rendered  by  the  board. 

38.  The  Secretary  of  the  general  meeting  shall  imme- 
diately transmit  to  the  Treasurer  of  the  Association,  with 


438  APPENDIX. 

the  balance  of  the  deposit,  if  any  remains,  a  detailed  mem- 
orandum, certified  by  himself, of  the  costs  adjudged  against 
any  of  the  two  parties  on  the  appeal  ;  and,  out  of  the  said 
balance  so  remaining,  the  Treasurer  shall  indemnify  the  per- 
son entitled  to  the  same  both  by  reason  of  the  decision  of  the 
board  and  the  general  meeting. 

VII.  Execution  of  Judgment. 

39.  Should  the  party  fail  to  pay  the  costs  adjudged 
against  him  within  fifteen  days  from  the  date  of  the  final 
decision  of  the  Board  of  Examiners,  if  there  has  been  no 
appeal,  or  of  the  general  meeting,  if  an  appeal  has  been 
taken,  the  party  to  whom  the  said  costs  are  due  may  obtain 
from  the  Superior  Court  of  the  district  where  the  complaint 
has  been  made,  an  execution  against  the  moveable  or  im- 
moveable property  of  the  person  condemned  to  pay  the  same, 
by  depositing  in  the  office  of  the  Prothonotary  of  the  court 
a  detailed  statement  of  such  costs,  duly  certified  by  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  board,  together  with  a  copy,  under  the  seal  of 
the  Association  and  certified  by  the  Secretary,  of  the  judg- 
ment condemning  the  party  to  pay  the  same. 

No  such  execution  shall  issue  against  immovables,  un- 
less the  amount  of  the  costs  to  be  recovered  exceeds  forty 
dollars. 

40.  In  addition  to  the  execution  next  above-mentioned, 
to  which  he  shall  be  liable,  if  the  party  in  default  of  paying 
the  costs  or  any  other  sum  adjudged  against  him  is  a  dentist, 
his  name  may  be  struck  off  the  roll  of  members  of  the 
Association,  and  he  shall  from  that  moment  be  deprived  of 
the  right  to  practice  the  profession  in  this  Province. 

But  he  may  have  his  name  reinscribed  and  resume  the 
practice  of  the  said  profession  by  paying  the  sums  adjudged 
against  him  and  all  costs  incurred  through  his  default. 

§    7.    OF   PENALTIES. 

"  4063.  Any  dentist  who  shall  have  been  found  guilty, 
before  any  court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  of  indecent  prac- 
tices in  the  exercise  of  his  profession,  felony,  perjury,  or  of 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  439 

any  other  offense  under  chapter  164  of  the  Revised  Statutes 
of  Canada,  concerning  larceny  and  other  offenses  of  a  like 
nature,  or  who  shall  render  himself  liable  to  civil  interdic- 
tion, or  become  deprived  of  any  of  his  civil  rights,  shall  lose 
ijyso  facto  the  right  of  practicing  as  a  dentist  within  this 
Province. 

"  4064.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  to  cause  his 
name  to  be  struck  off  the  roll  of  the  members  of  the  Asso- 
ciation so  soon  as  the  board  shall  have  been  apprised  of  the 
said  member's  disqualification. 

The  board  may,  nevertheless,  upon  the  petition  of  any 
dentist  whose  name  has  been  so  struck,  replace  the  said 
member's  name  upon  the  said  roll,  on  such  conditions  as  to 
the  board  may  seem  fit  and  advisable." 

"  4065.  Whosoever,  except  licensed  physicians  and  sur- 
geons, not  being  a  holder  of  a  license  as  a  dentist  legally 
granted  by  the  Board  of  Examiners,  and  whose  name  has  not 
been  registered  as  a  member  of  the  Dental  Association : 

'  1.  Practices  in  the  Province  as  a  dentist  for  a  remu- 
neration, or  in  the  hope  of  being  remunerated,  rewarded  or 
paid  for  his  services,  directly  or  indirectly ;  or  who 

'  2.  Attempts  to  evade  the  law  by  exacting  payment, 
reward  or  remuneration  for  his  services  as  a  dentist  by  the 
sale  of  drugs  or  medicines,  or  by  barter,  exchange  or  other- 
wise ;  or  who 

'  3.  Falsely  pretends  that  he  is  registered  as  a  dentist, 
or  that  he  is  the  holder  of  a  license  granted  by  virtue  of  the 
law,  or  who  makes  use  falsely  of  a  name,  title  or  quality,  or 
places  before  or  after  his  name  letters  or  signs  of  a  descrip- 
tion to  induce  the  belief  that  he  is  duly  authorized  to  prac- 
tice as  a  dentist,  or  who  makes  use  of  a  title  of  such  a  style 
as  to  induce  the  belief  that  he  has  obtained  any  diploma  or 
degree  from  any  college  of  dentistry,  or  who  makes  use  of 
any  sign,  title  or  indication  whatsoever  so  as  to  induce  the 
belief  that  he  has  obtained  the  aforesaid  degree  or  diploma ; 
or  who, 

*  4.  Without  being  previously  registered  as  a  dentist, 
and  without  a  license  legally  granted  as  aforesaid,  practices 


440  APPENDIX. 

for  a  remuneration,  or  in  the  hope  of  being  rewarded,  remu- 
nerated or  paid,  directly  or  indirectly,  under  the  name  of  a 
licensed  dentist ;  or  who, 

'  5.  Without  being  legally  registered  and  licensed,  prac- 
tices dentistry  for  a  remuneration,  or  with  the  hope  of  being 
directly  or  indirectly  rewarded,  in  the  office  or  under  the 
patronage  of  a  physician  or  surgeon  of  this  Province  not  duly 
authorized  to  practice  as  a  dentist ;  or  who, 

'  6.  After  being  suspended  from  the  exercise  of  the  den- 
tal profession  by  the  Board  of  Examiners,  or  after  being 
struck  off  the  roll  of  dentists  by  the  said  board  without  his 
name  having  been  regularly  replaced  thereon,  practices  den- 
tistry; 

'  Shall  be  liable  to  a  fine  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dol- 
lars, nor  of  more  than  fifty  dollars,  for  each  offense,  to  be  re- 
covered with  suits  of  cost  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  article 
4067.' 

"  4066.  The  fact  of  any  person,  not  being  licensed  accord- 
ing to  law,  extracting  teeth  or  performing  any  other  act  of 
dental  surgery  in  any  street  or  public  place,  or  in  any  hall, 
or  in  any  hotel,  and  then  and  there,  or  on  the  following  days, 
selling,  tendering  for  sale  or  gratuitously,  or  advertising  any 
medicine  whatsoever,  patented  or  not  patented  ;  or 

The  fact  of  any  person,  not  being  licensed  according  to 
law,  extracting  teeth,  or  performing  any  other  act  of  dental 
surgery  in  any  street  or  public  place,  or  in  any  hall,  or  in 
any  hotel,  in  the  company,  or  in  the  vehicle  of  any  person, 
and  then  and  there,  or  on  the  following  days,  selling,  tender- 
ing for  sale  or  gratuitously,  or  advertising  any  medicine 
whatsoever,  patented  or  not  patented  ; 

Shall  be  considered  as  conclusive  and  irrefutable  evi- 
dence that  the  said  person  is  practicing  the  profession  of  a 
dentist  in  the  hope  of  being  rewarded,  remunerated  and  paid 
indirectly,  within  the  meaning  of  the  provisions  of  paragraph 
1  of  Article  4065,  and  the  said  person  shall  be  punishable 
accordingly. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  441 

§  8.    OF    PROSECUTIONS. 

I. — Courts  Before  Which  Brought. 

"  4067.  The  lines  imposed  by  this  section  shall  be  re- 
coverable : 

1.  Before  any  District  Magistrate,  Judge  of  the  Sessions, 
Police  Magistrate,  Recorder  or  Justice  of  the  Peace,  who  shall 
then,  upon  the  written  and  sworn  complaint  of  any  person 
of  the  age  of  majority,  immediately  issue  against  the  defend- 
ant a  summons  which  shall  be  returnable  at  once,  and  which 
shall  be  decided  without  delay  ; 

2.  Before  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  county  or  district 
where  the  defendant  resides,  or  where  the  action  is  served 
upon  him,  or  where  the  offense  has  been  committed  ;  or 

3.  Before  the  Superior  Court  of  the  district  wherein 
the  defendant  resides,  or  where  the  writ  is  served  upon  him, 
or  where  the  offense  has  been  committed,  when  more  than 
one  fine  is  claimed  by  the  same  action,  or  when  the  amount 
claimed  comes  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Superior  Court. 

2.  With  reference  to  paragraphs  2  and  3  of  this  article, 
the  prosecution  shall  be  taken  by  and  on  behalf  of  the  Dental 
Association  of  the  Province  of  Quebec,  to  which  the  sole 
right  of  prosecuting  appertains. 

In  such  prosecutions,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  allege  the 
offense,  or  the  particular  causes  by  reason  of  which  the  said 
prosecution  is  instituted,  and  that  the  defendant  has  acted  in 
violation  of  the  law. 

II.  Procedure. 

"  4068.  In  all  prosecutions  upon  information  before  any 
of  the  functionaries  aforesaid,  all  the  provisions  of  chapter 
178  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  Canada,  respecting  summary 
proceedings,  including  the  schedule,  shall  apply  in  all  cases 
not  specially  herein  provided  for. 

The  decisions  of  such  functionaries  upon  such  prosecu- 
tions shall  be  without  appeal,  and  no  notice  or  writ  of  cer- 
tiorari shall  suspend  or  prevent  the  execution  of  the  con- 
viction pronounced  by  them,  unless  the  party  condemned,  on 


442  APPENDIX. 

giving  notice  of  the  certiorari,  deposits  with  the  clerk  of  the 
functionary  who  rendered  judgment,  the  amount  in  full  of 
the  fine  and  costs  imposed,  and  a  sum  of  fifty  dollars  as  secu- 
rity for  the  costs  of  the  adverse  party. 

"4069.  In  actions  Drought  before  the  courts  of  civil  ju- 
risdiction hereinabove  mentioned,  the  procedure  shall  be  sum- 
mary, according  to  the  provisions  of  chapter  first  of  title 
second  of  book  second  of  the  second  part  of  the  Code  of  Civil 
Procedure,  as  contained  in  article  5977  of  the  Revised  Stat- 
utes of  the  Province  of  Quebec. 

Any  cause  may  be  inscribed  at  the  same  time  for  proof 
and  final  hearing  on  the  merits. 

M  4070.  The  manner  of  proceeding  to  the  seizure  and 
sale  of  the  defendant's  goods,  and  all  the  other  laws  of  pro- 
cedure, as  well  as  the  rules  of  practice  and  the  tariff  of  the 
said  courts,  respectively,  shall  apply  in  all  cases  where  no 
special  provisions  are  enacted  by  this  section. 

"  4071.  In  case  of  an  information  lodged  before  one  of 
the  functionaries  named  in  paragraph  1  of  article  4067,  all 
the  provisions  of  chapter  178  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  Can- 
ada, respecting  summary  proceedings,  shall  apply,  in  so  far 
as  they  are  not  inconsistent  with  those  of  this  section. 

The  said  functionary  may  allow  the  counsel  of  the  suc- 
cessful party  a  fee,  in  accordance  with  the  tariff  of  the  civil 
court  of  the  district  where  the  case  is  heard,  as  in  an  ordinary 
action  of  sixty  dollars. 

III.  Proof. 

"  4072.  In  all  civil  prosecutions  and  upon  any  informa- 
tion under  article  4065,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  defendant 
to  prove  that  he  had  the  right  to  practice  as  a  surgeon-dentist 
in  the  Province,  that  he  had  the  right  to  assume  the  title, 
name  and  quality,  or  to  use  the  letters,  signs  or  indications 
which  he  is  charged  with  illegally  using  and  assuming. 

"  4073.  No  person,  otherwise  competent  as  a  witness,  in 
any  action  or  upon  any  information  under  this  section,  shall 
be  held  as  incompetent  by  reason  of  his  being  a  member  or  an 
officer  of  the  Association. 


DENTAL  JURISPRUDENCE.  443 

"  4074.  One  witness  only  shall  be  sufficient  to  prove  the 
offense  in  any  prosecution  or  information  for  the  recovery  of 
penalties  under  this  section. 

"  4075.  When  the  proof  of  the  registry  or  want  of  reg- 
istry is  required  under  this  section,  a  copy  or  an  extract  from 
the  register,  or  the  books  of  the  Association,  under  the  seal 
of  the  same  and  the  signature  of  the  Secretary,  shall  be  suffi- 
cient evidence  of  the  contents  of  the  said  copy  or  extract, 
without  its  being  necessary  to  produce  the  original. 

"  4076.  ]STo  person  illegally  following  the  profession  of  a 
dentist  shall  be  entitled  to  recover,  before  any  court  of  justice, 
any  sum  of  money  for  his  professional  services,  drugs  or  ar- 
ticles so  rendered,  sold  and  supplied. 

IV.  Execution  of  Judgments. 

"  4077.  In  default  of  immediate  payment  of  the  fine  and 
costs  imposed,  the  defendant  shall  be  imprisoned,  during  the 
space  of  not  less  than  three  months,  nor  of  more  than  six 
months,  in  the  common  gaol  of  the  district  where  the  sentence 
has  been  rendered,  unless  the  said  fine  and  costs  shall  be  sooner 
paid. 

2.  The  functionary  or  court  by  whom  the  judgment  is 
pronounced  may,  however,  in  place  of  ordering  the  immediate 
imprisonment  of  the  defendant,  grant  him  a  delay,  or  order 
the  attachment  and  sale  of  his  real  and  moveable  property  for 
the  acquittance  of  the  fine  and  costs  aforesaid  and  of  all  sub- 
sequent costs. 

3.  If,  at  the  expiration  of  the  delay  granted,  the  said 
fine  and  costs  are  not  paid,  or  if  the  sale  of  the  said  property 
of  the  defendant  has  not  been  sufficient  to  insure  the  acquit- 
tance of  the  said  fine  and  costs,  and  subsequent  costs,  the  said 
defendant  shall,  in  any  such  cases,  be  imprisoned  in  the  said 
gaol  during  the  space  of  not  less  than  three  months,  nor  more 
than  six  months,  unless  the  amount  of  the  fine  and  costs,  and 
all  subsequent  costs  incurred  through  his  default  be  sooner  paid. 

4.  When  the  defendant,  in  default  of  immediate  payment, 
is  sentenced  to  be  imprisoned  at  once,  the  warrant  of  commit- 
ment shall  be  signed  and  issued  without  delay  by  theProthon- 


444  APPENDIX. 

otary  or  the  Clerk  of  the  Court,  as  the  case  may  be,  no  special 
request  to  that  effect  being  necessary. 

5.  All  warrants  of  commitment  in  default  of  payment, 
after  the  expiration  of  the  delay  granted,  or  in  case  of  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  defendant's  property,  or  any  writ  of  execution 
against  him,  shall  be  signed  and  issued  by  the  Prothonotary 
or  Clerk,  as  the  case  may  be,  upon  the  fiat  of  an  attorney  ad 
litem,  wherein  it  shall  be  alleged  that  the  amount  of  the  con- 
demnation and  costs  is  still  due  in  whole  or  in  part. 

The  above  warrant  of  commitment  may  be  mutatis  mu- 
tandis in  the  forms  0  1  and  No.  5  of  the  schedule  of  chapter 
178  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  Canada,  respecting  summary 
proceedings,  and  shall  be  executed  by  any  bailiff  or  constable. 

6.  The  writ  of  execution  shall  be  executed  by  a  bailiff. 
"  4078.  Any  person  so  imprisoned  may,  in  any  case,  be 

set  free  upon  payment  of  the  fine  and  costs,  and  of  all  costs 
subsequent  to  his  condemnation,  including  the  expenses  of 
his  removal  to  gaol,  or,  in  case  of  the  sale  of  his  goods,  upon 
payment  of  the  balance  remaining  due. 

2.  The  total  sum  to  be  paid  for  the  discharge  of  the 
person  so  imprisoned,  must,  in  all  cases,  be  mentioned  on  the 
back  of  the  writ  of  commitment. 

§   9.   APPLICATION   OF   FINES. 

"  4079.  All  fines  imposed  by  virtue  of  this  section  shall 
belong  to  the  said  Association,  and  shall  be  paid  into  the 
hands  of  the  Treasurer  thereof. 

"  4080.  If  the  goods  of  the  defendant  are  sold,  or  if  the 
said  defendant  is  confined  in  gaol,  the  officer  conducting  the 
sale,  or  the  gaoler,  as  the  case  may  be,  shall,  without  delay, 
remit  into  the  hands  of  the  said  Treasurer  all  sums  of  money 
received  in  partial  or  total  acquittance  of  the  fine  and  costs 
incurred. 

§    10.    EXCEPTIONAL   PROVISIONS. 

"4081.  Save  and  except  the  privileges  conferred  upon 
physicians  and  surgeons  by  the  different  laws  of  this  Pro- 
vince, no  person  shall  carry  on  the  profession  of  a  dentist  in 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  445 

the  Province,  unless  he  is  in  possession  of  a  license  issued  by 
the  Dental  Association  of  the  Province  of  Quebec. 

Save  the  said  privileges,  should  any  physician  or  any 
one  legally  holding  a  license  in  virtue  of  the  laws  of  this 
Province,  and  authorized  as  such  therein,  desire  to  practice 
as  a  dentist  and  to  make  himself  known  publicly  as  such, 
he  shall  be  obliged  to  previously  obtain  a  license  from  the 
Board  of  Examiners  of  the  Association  by  passing  an  examin- 
ation upon  the  mechanical  and  operative  parts  of  dental  sur- 
gery, and  paying  the  fee  fixed  by  the  regulations  for  the 
obtaining  of  the  said  license." 

"4082.  The  privileges  and  exemptions  conferred  upon 
physicians  and  surgeons  by  the  laws  of  this  Province  are 
hereby  granted  to  licensed  dentists. 

"4083.  Everything  that,  under  this  section  may  or 
must  be  made  and  performed  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Board 
of  Examiners,  may,  in  his  absence  or  default,  be  made  and 
performed,  in  the  same  manner  and  with  a  like  effect,  by  the 
Treasurer. 

This  provision  shall  also  apply  to  all  services  which  are, 
under  this  section,  to  be  made  upon  the  said  Secretary. 

If  the  day  on  which  a  thing  may  be  or  ought  to  be  done 
under  this  section  be  a  non-juridical  day,  then  the  said  thing 
may  or  shall  be  done  on  the  first  following  juridical  day. 

2.  This  Act  shall  come  into  force  on  the  day  of  its 
sanction." 

Assented  to  March  21st,  1889. 


QUEBEC. 

AMENDED   LAW. 


An  Act  to  Amend  the  Acts  Respecting  the  Dental  Association  of 

the  Province  of  Quebec. 
Her  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Legis- 
lature of  Quebec,  enacts,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  Section  1  of  the  Act  46  Victoria,  chapter  34, 
is  amended  by  adding  thereto  the  following  paragraph  : 


446  APPENDIX. 

"All  members  of  the  Dental  Association  of  the  Prov^ 
ince  of  Quebec  shall,  on  or  before  the  third  clay  of  September, 
in  each  year,  pay  to  the  Treasurer  of  the  Association  an 
annual  fee  of  two  dollars." 

Sec.  2.  The  following  section  is  added,  after  section  6  of 
the  said  Act : 

"  6a.  In  addition  to  being  disqualified  from  voting 
under  section  6,  any  member  of  the  association  who  neglects 
to  pay  his  dues  and  fees  in  arrear,  after  thirty  days'  notice 
sent  by  the  Secretary  of  the  association  to  such  member,  by 
registered  letter,  may  be  sued  for  such  dues  and  fees  before 
any  civil  court  of  competent  jurisdiction." 

Sec.  3.  The  following  section  is  added  after  section  7  of 
the  said  Act : 

"  la.  Students  of  dental  surgery,  regularly  indentured, 
shall  study  for  four  years  in  the  office  of  a  licentiate,  and 
during  such  time  shall  attend,  at  least,  one  course  of  lectures 
in  any  medical  or  dental  college,  after  which,  on  complying 
with  the  formalities  prescribed  by  the  by-laws  of  the  associ- 
ation, and  on  production  of  the  certificates  establishing  such 
attendance  at  such  medical  or  dental  college,  they  shall  be 
entitled  to  be  admitted  to  examination,  and,  upon  passing 
such  examination  successfully,  shall  be  admitted  as  licentiates 
of  dental  surgery. 

"Any  such  student,  who  is  the  holder  of  a  diploma  from 
any  college  of  dental  surgery  recognized  b}'  the  association, 
shall,  after  three  years'  service  under  indentures,  including 
the  time  spent  at  the  said  college,  on  complying  with  the 
said  formalities,  and  paying  the  fees  established  by  the  board, 
be  entitled  to  be  admitted  to  examination,  and,  upon  passing 
such  examination  successfully,  shall  be  entitled  to  be  ad- 
mitted as  a  licentiate  of  dental  surgery." 

Sec.  4.  Section  19  of  the  said  Act  is  replaced  by  the  fol- 
io wing  : 

"  19.  Every  person  not  being  the  bearer  of  a  dentist's 
license,  granted  by  the  Board  of  Examiners  of  the  Dental 
Association  of  the  Province  of  Quebec,  and  not  registered  as 
a  member  of  the  association : 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  447 

"  a.  Who  practices  in  this  province  as  a  dentist  for 
remuneration,  or  in  the  hope  of  reward  or  payment,  either 
directly  or  indirectly,  or 

"  b.  Who  attempts  to  evade  the  law  by  causing  his  ser- 
vices as  dentist  to  be  indirectly  paid  by  means  of  the  sale  of 
drugs  or  medicines,  or  barter,  or  otherwise,  or 

"  e.  Who  falsely  pretends  to  be  registered  or  hold  a 
license  granted  under  the  law  respecting  the  Dental  Associa- 
tion, or  takes  or  uses  in  any  way  any  name,  title,  or  quality, 
calculated  to  convey  the  impression  that  such  person  is 
authorized  to  practice  as  a  dentist,  or  makes  use  of  any  title 
intending  to  cause  it  to  be  believed  that  he  is  a  graduate  of  a 
college  of  dentists,  or  uses  any  title  representing  in  any  way 
that  he  is  such  a  graduate,  or 

"d.  Who,  without  license,  practices  as  a  dentist  for 
remuneration  or  in  the  hope  of  reward,  directly  or  indirectly, 
under  the  name  of  a  licensed  dentist,  outside  the  office  or 
locality  of  practice  of  such  licensed  dentist,  or  practices  as 
such  unlicensed  dentist  for  remuneration,  or  in  the  hope  of 
reward,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  the  office  or  under  the  name 
or  patronage  of  a  physician  or  surgeon  of  this  province  not 
authorized  to  practice  dentistry, 

"  Shall  incur  a  penalty  of  not  less  than  twenty-five  dol- 
lars, nor  exceeding  two  hundred  dollars,  for  each  oftense, 
together  with  full  costs  of  suit  as  brought. 

"  In  default  of  payment  of  such  penalty  and  costs  within 
fifteen  days  from  the  date  of  rendering  such  judgment,  or 
such  shorter  time  as  the  court  may  fix,  the  amount  thereof 
may  be  recovered  by  the  seizure  and  sale,  in  the  ordinary 
manner,  under  execution,  of  the  movable  or  immovable  prop- 
erty of  the  defendant ;  and  in  default  of  sufficient  movable 
or  immovable  property  to  satisfy  the  judgment  in  penalty, 
costs  and  subsequent  costs,  the  defendant  shall  be  condemned 
to  imprisonment  in  the  common  gaol  of  the  district  in  which 
judgment  lias  been  rendered,  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  two 
nor  exceeding  six  months,  unless  such  penalty,  costs  and  sub- 
sequent costs  be  sooner  paid." 

2.  Prosecutions  instituted  for  the  recovery  of  any  penalty 


448  APPENDIX. 

imposed  by  this  Act  may  be  instituted  and  sued  for  in  the 
name  of"  The  Dental  Association  of  the  Province  of  Quebec," 
or  by  any  person  in  his  own  name,  in  the  same  form  and 
under  the  same  rules  of  procedure  as  ordinary  civil  actions 
for  the  recovery  of  debt,  in  any  Circuit  Court  of  the  county 
or  district  in  which  the  defendant  resides,  or  in  which  he 
may  be  served  with  the  writ  of  summons,  or  in  which  the 
infringement  was  committed. 

Suits  may  also  be  instituted  before  the  Superior  Court 
for  any  such  district,  in  the  event  of  more  than  one  penalty 
being  sued  for  in  the  same  action,  or  where  the  amount  sued 
for  would  give  such  Superior  Court  jurisdiction. 

3.  It  shall  be  sufficient,  in  any  action  or  suit  to  recover 
penalties  under  this  Act,  to  state  in  the  declaration  that  the 
defendant  is  indebted  to  the  plaintiff  in  the  sum  of  money 
thereby  demanded,  and  to  allege  the  particular  offense  for 
which  the  action  is  brought,  and  that  the  defendant  hath 
acted  contrary  to  law. 


HOLLAND. 

In  Holland,  dentistry  was  restricted  for  years  by  a  sep- 
arate law.  In  the  year  1865,  it  was  decided  to  make  the 
law  uniform,  and  those  deseiwing  to  practice  dental  surgery 
were  compelled  to  study  medicine ;  the  degree  of  doctor  of 
medicine  entitled  them  to  practice  dental  surgery  without 
further  study  or  examination.  But  few  persons,  however, 
directed  exclusive  attention  to  dentistry  up  to  1878,  when  in 
December  of  that  year  a  law  was  passed  regulating  the  con- 
ditions for  obtaining  the  degree  to  practice  medicine,  mid- 
wifery, dentistry,  etc.  The  new  law  pertaining  to  dentistry 
provides,  as  follows : 

Article  1.  For  the  degree  of  dentist  (Trandmuster — 
licentiate  to  practice  dentistry),  by  which  is  understood  local 
treatment  of  the  diseases  to  which  the  teeth,  alveolar  process 
and  gums  are  liable. 

Art.  2.  This  degree  is  obtained  after  having  passed  the 
practical  examinations  successfully,  that  is,  satisfactory  proofs 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  449 

are  required  of  the  knowledge  of  operative  dentistry  and  the 
placing  of  artificial  dentures. 

Art.  3.  To  the  practical  examination  those  only  are  ad- 
mitted, who  have  passed  their  theoretical  examination  on 
dentistry  successfully. 

Art.  4.  The  theoretical  examination  comprises  the  anat- 
omy of  the  teeth,  alveolar  process,  and  gums ;  their  physi- 
ology, hygiene,  pathology,  and  therapeutics,  in  which  is 
included  the  knowledge  of  diagnosing  the  diseases  of  the 
teeth,  alveolar  process,  and  gums,  whether  arising  locally  or 
remote  (constitutional),  pharmaco-dynamics,  and  the  art  of 
prescribing,  when  it  is  necessary,  local  remedies  for  the  dis- 
eases of  the  above-named  parts. 

Art.  5.  The  medical  universities  of  the  Netherlands  are 
qualified  (have  the  right)  to  examine  on  theoretic  dentistry, 
and  to  give  a  certificate  to  those  who  have  successfully  passed 
the  same. 

Art.  6.  The  amount  of  five-and-twenty  (25)  guilders 
must  be  paid  to  the  President  of  the  faculty  by  the  applicant 
before  submitting  to  the  examination.  In  case  of  being  un- 
successful, no  second  payment  is  required  at  the  second  ap- 
plication. 

Art.  7.  A  diploma  will  be  given  when  the  examinations 
have  been  passed  satisfactorily,  and  the  amount  of  twenty- 
five  guilders  has  been  paid  to  the  President  of  the  committee, 
which  entitles  the  possessor  to  style  himself  a  physician,  den- 
tist, etc. 

Art.  8.  All  those  having  passed  their  examination  suc- 
cessfully must,  before  being  admitted,  take  in  the  presence  of 
the  President  of  the  Examining  Board  the  following  oath  (or 
promise) :  I  swear  (or  promise)  that  I  will  practice  dentistry 
according  to  the  legally  fixed  stipulation  and  to  the  best  of 
niy  knowledge  and  ability  ;  that  I  never  in  my  practice  will 
disclose  to  any  one  what  in  secret  is  trusted  to  me,  or  come 
to  my  knowledge,  except  when  my  testimony  is  required  as 
witness  or  expert  by  the  court,  or  I  am  legally  obliged  to  give 
information.     So  help  me  God  (that  I  promise). 

Resolutions  passed  February  12th,  1879: 


450  APPENDIX. 

Article  1.  Two  periods  will  be  appointed  in  the  civil 
year  for  making  the  examinations,  the  first  lasting  six  weeks- 
in  the  first  eight  months,  and  the  last  for  four  weeks  during 
the  remaining  four  months.  The  day  and  hour  will  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  President  of  the  faculty,  or  by  the  member 
who  tills  his  place. 

Art.  2.  The  faculty  convenes  with  no  less  than  three 
members  present,  and  examines  but  one  at  a  time.  The  suc- 
cess of  the  candidate  must  be  decided  by  a  majority  vote.  It 
a  division  of  the  vote  is  for  rejection,  this  rejection  is  for  one 
year. 

Art.  3.  The  examination  is  held  in  the  Dutch  language,, 
unless  the  faculty  (board)  consents  to  the  use  of  a  foreign  lan- 
guage, at  the  request  of  the  candidate.  All  examinations  are 
public,  unless  the  board  otherwise  decides. 

Art.  4.  A  dated  certificate,  and  written  in  the  Dutch 
language,  signed  by  the  President  or  pro  tern.  President,  will  be 
given  to  him  who  passes  his  examination  successfully. 

Art.  5.  The  day  and  hour  for  the  examination  are  fixed 
by  the  President  of  the  board,  or  pro  tern.  President,  which  is 
communicated  by  the  Secretary  to  the  parties  concerned. 

February  12th,  1879.  Willem  Kappeyne, 

Minister  of  Interior. 

The  illegal  practice  of  dentistry  in  Holland  (that  is,  prac- 
tice without  a  diploma)  is  punished  by  imprisonment  for  from 
one  to  six  months,  and  a  fine  of  from  5  to  25-100  florins.  The 
penalties  are  equally  applicable  to  dentists  who  employ  anaes- 
thetics, chloroform,  nitrous  oxide  gas,  etc.,  as  to  those  who- 
prescribe  internal  remedies,  or  who  sell  materials,  such  as 
powders,  elixirs,  or  other  dentifrices  for  cleaning  the  teeth. 
— France  Medicale. 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  451 

ITALY. 

The  following  is  a  literal  translation  of  the  law  regu- 
lating the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  Kingdom  of  Italy : 

No.  6850,  series  3,  in  collection  of  official  laws  and 
decrees  of  the  Kingdom  of  Italy,  contains  the  following : 

Humbert  I,  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  will  of  the  nation. 
King  of  Italy:  Seen  the  laws  of  November  13th,  1859,  No. 
3725  ;  February  16th,  1861 ;  October  8th,  1876 ;  December 
22nd,  1888 ;  October  9th,  1889 ;  and  with  the  intention  of 
establishing  fixed  rules  and  identical  methods  of  conferring: 
the  diploma  of  dentistry  in  all  the  universities  of  the  king- 
dom ;  having  conferred  with  our  Council  of  Superior  Instruc- 
tion ;  having  heard  the  Council  of  State  on  the  proposition 
of  our  Minister-Secretary  of  State  for  Public  Instruction,  and 
Secretary  of  State  for  internal  affairs,  we  do  hereby  decree : 

Article  1.  Whosoever  shall  desire  to  practice  dentistry 
or  phlebotomy  must  have  the  degree  in  medicine  and  surgery. 

Art.  2.  The  teaching  of  dentistry  shall  be  imparted  in 
the  surgical  institutes  of  those  faculties  in  our  kingdom y 
which  can  demonstrate  having  the  necessary  means  and. 
persons  capable  of  such  teaching  according  to  the  most  recent 
progress  of  the  specialty. 

Art.  3.  The  nomination  of  teachers  shall  be  made 
according  to  the  existing  rules  for  the  appointment  of  pro- 
fessors extraordinary,  after  having  heard  the  opinion  of  the 
Superior  Council. 

Art.  4.  Those  who  have  entered  the  courses  in  dentistry 
or  phlebotomy  previous  to  the  publication  of  this  decree,  can 
finish  and  obtain  their  degrees  under  the  rules  in  operation 
at  the  time  of  their  entry.  They  also,  as  well  as  dentists 
already  in  practice,  can  continue  under  the  article  60  of  the 
law  of  October  9th,  1889,  No.  6442  (series  3). 

We  order  that  the  present  decree,  furnished  with  the 
seal  of  state,  be  inscribed  among  the  official  laws  and  decrees- 
of  our  kingdom,  and  be  it  seen  that  this  law  shall  be  observed. 

Given  in  Rome,  April  24th,  1890. 

[seal.]  Boselle.  Humbert. 

Cbispl 


452  APPENDIX. 

MEXICO. 

There  is  no  national  law  regulating  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  Mexico.  Each  state  makes  its  own  laws,  and  these 
differ.  In  no  state,  however,  can  a  dentist  practice  his  pro- 
fession without  a  license.  The  mere  presentation  of  a  diploma 
is  not  sufficient.  Permission  to  practice  must  be  had  either 
from  the  Medical  Council,  where  such  exists,  or  from  the  local 
authorities.  The  general  Medical  Council  has  power  to  license 
for  practice,  upon  examination,  in  any  part  of  the  Republic. 
It  also  grants  a  diploma  to  such  as  are  deemed  worthy. 


RUSSIA. 

The  Imperial  Council  in  the  United  Departments  of  Im- 
perial Economy  and  Laws  and  in  General  Council,  after  dis- 
cussing the  recommendation  of  the  Minister  of  the  Interior  in 
reference  to  their  organization  of  the  study  of  the  profession  of 
dentistry,  has  rendered  the  following  opinion : 

I.  To  change  and  amend  the  existing  articles  of  the  den- 
tal statute  (Digest  of  Laws,  XIII,  1857),  as  follows : 

Section  1.  The  specially  practical  learned  medical  titles, 
acquired  after  examination  by  persons  studying  the  profes- 
sion of  dentistry,  are  a,  dentist  and  6,  dental  surgeon. 

Sec.  2.  The  title  of  dentist  is  acquired  according  to  arti- 
•cle  478,  of  the  Medical  Regulations.  Any  person  seeking  the 
title  of  dentist  must  present : 

1.  A  diploma,  certified  to  by  the  signature  of  the  local 
medical  authorities,  that  he  has  been  studying  the  profession 
of  dentistry  with  a  known  dentist  for  not  less  than  three 
years,  with  good  success,  and  that  he  has  performed  the  vari- 
ous dental  operations  upon  living  persons,  with  proper  skill 
and  knowledge ; 

2.  Pass  an  examination  on  the  anatomy  of  the  human 
maxilla,  teeth  and  gums  ;  on  diseases  affecting  those  parts,  and 
the  method  to  cure  them  by  such  local  means  which  are 
allowed  only  a  dentist  to  use  ; 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  453 

3.  Submit  to  a  practical  examination  in  a  clinic,  and  per- 
form several  dental  operations  on  corpses  and  on  living  persons- 

Remark  : — Women  can  also  obtain  the  title  of  dentists, 
after  conforming  to  all  the  above  regulations. 

Sec.  3.  To  instruct  all  persons  who  desire  to  receive  the 
title  of  surgeon,  dental  schools  are  established  according  to  the 
normal  regulations  for  such  schools,  prepared  by  the  Medi- 
cal Council  and  confirmed  by  the  Minister  of  the  Interiorr 
with  the  approval  of  the  Ministers  of  Public  Instruction  and 
"War,  on  the  following  chief  conditions : 

1.  The  dental  schools  are  in  charge  of  the  Minister  of 
the  Interior,  under  the  direct  supervision  of  the  Local  Medical 
Inspector ; 

2.  The  said  school  can  be  established  with  the  permission 
of  the  Local  Medical  Department,  which  enters  into  a  pre- 
liminary agreement  on  this  subject  with  the  school  trustees 
of  the  district ; 

3.  The  dental  schools  are  supported  by  their  founders ; 

4.  The  management  of  the  school  is  entrusted,  on  the 
recommendation  of  the  Local  Medical  Inspector^  with  the  ap- 
proval of -the  Medical  Council,  to  a  person  who  has  graduated 
after  a  full  course  of  studies  in  any  institution  not  of  a  lower 
grade  than  a  high  school.  The  founder  of  a  school  can  be 
its  director,  if  he  complies  with  the  above  demand ; 

5.  Only  persons  having  learned  degrees  can  teach.  They 
are  confirmed  by  the  Medical  Inspector; 

6.  To  enter  the  dental  school,  a  diploma  is  required,  certi- 
fying that  the  applicant  has  been  graduated  from  at  least  a 
common  high  school  of  six  classes ; 

7.  The  course  of  studies  in  the  dental  schools  continues 
for  two  years  and  a  half,  and  is  divided  in  five  half-years 
(semesters) ; 

8.  Into  the  composition  of  the  course  of  studies  enter: 
«,  physics ;  6,  chemistry  (general  and  dental) ;  c,  anatomy 
of  the  human  body ;  c/,  histology  and  physiology  ;  e,  special 
anatomy,  histology  and  the  developement  of  the  teeth  and 


454  APPENDIX. 

the  adjoining  parts;  /,  general  pathology,  and  pathologi- 
cal anatomy  ;  y,  local  pathology  and  therapeutics  of  the  dis- 
eases of  the  teeth  and  the  gums;  /<,  general  surgery ;  i,  oral 
surgery  ;  k,  pharmocology  and  pharmacy  ;  I,  general  diagno- 
sis and  therapeutics ;  m,  prosthetic  and  operative  dentistry  ; 
??,  filling  and  hygiene  of  the  teeth  ;  o,  clinic  of  the  diseases 
■of  the  teeth  and  of  the  mouth ;  p,  prosthetic  clinic  and  tech- 
nology, and  </,  practical  studies  in  general  and  special  chem- 
istry, microscopy,  anatomical  dissections,  extracting  of  teeth 
on  corpses  and  operations  under  anaesthetics ; 

9.  The  dental  schools  are  incorporated  as  private  educa- 
tional institutions  of  the  first  degree  ; 

Sec.  4.  The  title  of  a  dental  surgeon  is  accorded  to 
persons  who  have  followed  with  success  the  course  of  a  den- 
tal school,  and  have  passed  a  successful  examination  before 
the  Examining  Commissioner  at  the  University,  or  the  Im- 
perial Military  Medical  Academy. 

Sec.  5.  Women  can  obtain  the  title  of  dentist  or  dental 
surgeon  on  the  same  basis. 

Sec.  6.  Graduates  of  a  dental  school  who  have  received 
a  diploma  of  a  dental  surgeon,  have  a  right  to  practice  their 
specialty,  under  the  conditions  specified  in  the  genfiral  regu- 
lations thereof. 

II.  To  amend  Article  481  of  the  statute  on  civil  service 
(Digest  Laws,  III,  1876),  as  follows  : 

"  In  entering  the  Imperial  service,  dentists  enjoy  the 
right  of  the  degree  of  the  tenth  class,  in  which  they  are  con- 
tinued after  a  satisfactory  service  of  four  years,  by  seniority, 
from  the  time  of  their  entering  the  service." 

III.  To  formulate  Article  56  of  the  statute  on  military 
service  (Digest  of  Laws,  IV,  1886),  in  the  following  manner: 

Art.  56.  Persons  who  have  the  title  of  dentist  enjoy  the 
following  privileges  in  their  military  obligations  : 

1.  Those  who  have  passed  a  course  of  five  classes  in  the 
high  schools,  or  who  have  passed  an  examination  in  the 
subjects  of  this  course,  the  privileges  of  the  second  degree ;  and 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  455 

2.  Those  who  have  finished  a  course  of  a  two-class  vil- 
lage school  of  the  Ministry  of  Public  Enlightenment,  or  have 
passed  an  examination  in  the  subjects  of  this  course,  the 
privilege  of  the  third  degree. 

The  original  opinion  is  signed  in  the  journals  by  the 
President  and  the  members.  (Extract  from  the  "  Journals  of 
the  United  Departments  of  the  Imperial  Economy  and  Laws," 
January  31st,  and  the  General  Council,  April  8th,  1891.) 

Xone  of  the  Russian  subjects,  or  foreigners,  who  have 
no  diploma  or  certificate  from  the  Medico-Chirurgical  (Im- 
perial Military  Medical)  Academy  and  Universities,  can  prac- 
tice any  branch  of  the  medical,  dental  or  veterinary  professions 
in  Russia.     (Comp.  Crim.  Code,  1885,  sec.  104.) 

Foreign  doctors  who  desire  to  pursue  their  practice  in 
Russia  must,  in  addition,  be  familiar  with  the  Russian  lan- 
guage.    (Med.  Statutes,  XIII,  sec.  125,  1886.) 

In  reference  to  the  preparation  and  disposition  of  the  ar- 
ticles prepared  by  dental  surgeons  (dentists),  the  following 
rules  are  observed : 

1.  Dental  surgeons  (dentists)  are  obliged  to  use  for  fill- 
ings, artificial  dentures,  etc.,  gold  of  a  standard  not  lower 
than  seventy-two,  and  silver  not  lower  than  eighty-four  per 
cent.,  and  of  the  number  of  other  metals  and  compositions 
only  the  absolutely  harmless  ones,  after  their  approval  for 
such  use  by  the  Medical  Council ; 

2.  For  every  article  of  his  a  dentist  must  give  the  pur- 
chaser thereof,  at  the  latter's  request,  a  receipt,  with  an  ex- 
planation of  the  kind  and  quality  of  metals  used  in  that  article. 
The  form  of  such  receipts  is  prescribed  by  the  Medical  Council ; 

3.  For  the  violation  of  the  condition  stipulated  in  section 
1,  and  also  for  the  refusal  to  give  a  receipt,  or  for  giving  the 
same  not  in  the  prescribed  form,  or  for  the  forgery  of  its  con- 
tents, dental  surgeons  are  liable,  on  the  general  basis,  to 
prosecution,  in  either  the  administrative  or  criminal  codes. 
(Digest  of  Crim.  Cts.,  1883,  sec.  1214  and  1218.) 


456  APPENDIX. 

SPAIX. 

The  statutes  regulating  the  practice  of  dentistry  in 
Spain  require  of  the  dentist  who  desires  to  practice  the 
profession  in  that  country,  that  he  pass  a  satisfactory  exami- 
nation in  the  various  dental  subjects,  before  a  Board  of  Ex- 
aminers appointed  for  that  purpose.  These  examinations 
are  in  the  Spanish  language.  In  addition,  the  candidate 
must  prove  his  practical  ability  in  the  treatment  and  filling 
of  the  teeth,  etc.,  also  make  a  vulcanite  plate  (for  one  of  the 
many  hospital  patients).  These  operations  must  be  done 
under  the  supervision  of  the  Board  of  Examiners,  who  thus 
can  observe  and  examine  them  in  the  various  stages. 

These  examinations  occur  semi-annually,  in  April  and 
October. 


DENTAL  LEGISLATION. 


SUPPLEMENT. 


ARIZONA. 

An  Act  to  regulate  the  practice  of  Dentistry  in  Arizona. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislative  Assembly  of  the 
Territory  of  Arizona,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person, 
who  is  not  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  engaged  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  Territory,  to  commence  such 
practice  unless  such  person  shall  have  received  a  license  from 
the  Board  of  Examiners,  as  hereinafter  provided  for. 

Sec.  2.  The  Governor  of  the  Territory  shall  appoint, 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  five  (5)  skilled  dentists  of  good 
repute,  residing  and  doing  business  in  the  Territory,  who 
shall  constitute  a  Board  of  Registration  in  Dentistry. 

But  no  person  shall  be  eligible  to  serve  on  said  board 
unless  they  have  been  regularly  graduated  from  some  reputable 
dental  college,  duly  authorized  to  grant  degrees  in  dentistry, 
or  who  shall  have  been  actively  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  for  a  period  of  ten  (10)  years  previous  to  appoint- 
ment. 

Sec  3.  The  length  of  term  for  which  the  members  of 
?aid  board  shall  hold  office  shall  be  three  (3)  years,  except 
that  two  of  the  members  of  the  board,  first  to  be  appointed 
under  this  Act,  shall  hold  office  for  the  term  of  one  (1)  year, 
two  for  the  term  of  two  (2)  years,  and  one  for  the  term  of 
(3)  years  respectively,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  duly 
appointed  and  qualified. 


11  SUPPLEMENT. 

Iii  case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  said  board,  such 
vacancy  shall  he  tilled  by  the  Governor  in  conformity  with 
Section  2. 

Sec.  4.  Said  hoard  shall  choose  one  of  its  niemhers 
President,  and  one  Secretary  and  Treasurer,  and  it  shall  meet 
at  least  once  a  year,  and  ot'tener  if  it  shall  be  deemed  neces- 
sary. 

Four  of  said  hoard  shall  constitute  a  quorum. 

The  proceedings  of  said  board  shall  at  all  reasonable 
times  be  open  to  public  inspection. 

Sec.  5.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  person  now  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  Territory,  within  ninety 
(90)  days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  send  an  affidavit 
to  the  Secretary  of  said  board,  setting  forth  his  or  her  name, 
place  of  business,  post-office  address,  the  length  of  time  they 
have  been  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  Terri- 
tory ;  if  a  graduate  of  a  dental  college,  state  the  name  of  col- 
lege, and  shall  pay  to  the  Treasurer  of  said  board  the  sum  of 
five  (5)  dollars,  for  which  they  shall  receive  from  said  board 
a  practitioner's  certificate. 

On  failure  to  comply  with  the  provisions  of  this  section 
they  shall  be  rerpuired  to  appear  before  the  board,  and  be  ex- 
amined by  said  board. 

Sec  6.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  persons  not  holding 
diplomas,  who  wish  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in 
this  Territory,  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  appear  before 
said  board  at  a  regular  meeting  and  pay  into  the  treasury  of 
said  board  the  fee  of  twenty-five  (25)  dollars,  not  returnable, 
and  stand  an  examination  by  said  board  in  operative  and 
prosthetic  dentistry,  and  all  the  branches  taught  in  a  reputable 
dental  college  ;  and  if  such  applicants  pass  an  examination 
satisfactory  to  said  board,  said  board  shall  issue  to  said  ap- 
plicant a  license  which  will  entitle  him  or  her  to  practice 
dentistry  in  this  Territory. 

Sec.  7.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  persons  holding 
diplomas,  who  wish  to  engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry, 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  present  or  send  to  the  Secre- 
tarv  at  the  regular  meeting  of  said  board,  an  affidavit  and 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  Ill 

diploma  with  fee  (85),  not  returnable,  and  after  said  board 
being  satisfied  that  said  diploma  belongs  to  said  applicant 
and  that  it  was  issued  in  good  faith  by  a  reputable  dental 
college,  said  board  shall  issue  to  said  applicant  a  certificate 
of  registration  for  said  diploma. 

Sec  8.  All  persons  receiving  a  certificate  to  practice 
under  this  Act  shall  register  his  or  her  certificate  with  the 
County  Recorder  of  the  county  in  which  he  or  she  resides,  and 
shall  pay  to  the  County  Recorder  for  such  registration  the  sum 
of  two  (2)  dollars. 

Any  failure  on  the  part  of  any  person  holding  such  cer- 
tificate to  comply  with  the  first  part  of  this  section  within 
thirty  (30)  days  after  receiving  certificate,  shall  forfeit  said 
certificate,  and  any  certificate  once  forfeited  shall  not  be  re- 
turned by  said  board  until  applicant  shall  have  paid  to  said 
board  the  fine  of  twenty-five  (25)  dollars. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  County  Recorder  to  forward 
to  the  Secretary  of  said  board  the  names  of  all  persons  having 
registered  their  certificates  with  them. 

Sec  9.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  board  to  cause  to  be 
kept  a  record  of  all  its  proceedings,  and  the  names  and 
addresses  of  all  persons  qualifying  under  this  Act. 

An  annual  report  of  the  same  shall  be  rendered  to  the 
Governor. 

All  moneys  received  by  the  Secretary  under  this  Act 
shall  be  used  for  the  legitimate  expenses  of  said  board,  but 
in  no  case  shall  any  money  of  the  Territory  be  used  for  that 
purpose. 

Sec.  10.  Any  person  or  persons  violating  any  provisions 
of  this  Act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and 
upon  conviction  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  one  hundred  (100) 
dollars,  nor  more  than  two  hundred  (200)  dollars,  or  confined 
six  months  in  the  county  jail,  or  both,  for  each  and  every 

offenSC 

All  fine-  recovered  under  this  Act  shall  be  paid  into  the 
common-school  fund  of  the  county  in  which  such  conviction 
take-  place. 


IV  SUPPLEMENT. 

Sec  11.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  prosecuting  attorney 
of  each  county  to  prosecute  such  cases  when  brought  to  his 
knowledge. 

Sec.  12.  That  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed 
so  as  to  interfere  with  the  rights  and  privileges  of  resident 
physicians  and  surgeons  in  the  discharge  of  their  professional 
duties. 

Sec  13.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately  after 
its  passage. 

Approved  April  3,  1893. 


DISTRICT  OF  COLUMBIA. 

An  Act  for  the  regulation  of  the  practice  of  Dentistry  in  the 
District  of  Columbia,  and  for  the  protection  of  the  -people 
from  empiricism,  in  relation  thereto. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  United  States  of  America,  in  Congress  as- 
sembled, That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  practice 
dentistry  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  unless  such  person  shall 
register  with  the  health  officer,  in  compliance  wTith  the  require- 
ments hereinafter  provided. 

Sec  2.  That  a  board  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  this 
Act  is  hereby  created,  to  be  known  as  the  Board  of  Dental 
Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  reputable  dentists  resident  of  and 
for  three  years  last  before  appointment  actively  engaged  in 
the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  to  be 
appointed  by  the  Commissioners  of  said  District  for  terms  of 
five  years  and  until  their  successors  are  appointed  ;  provided. 
that  the  first  five  appointments  shall  be  made  for  terms  of 
one,  two,  three,  four  and  five  years,  respectively.  A  majority 
of  said  board  shall  constitute  a  quorum.  Vacancies  occurring 
in  said  board  shall  be  filled  by  appointment  of  eligible  persons 
for  unexpired  terms. 

Sec  3.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Dental 
Examiners,  first  to  organize  by  electing  one  of  their  number 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  V 

President  and  one  Secretary,  to  provide  necessary  books  and 
blank  forms,  and  publicly  announce  the  requirements  of  this 
Act,  and  the  time,  place,  and  means  of  complying  with  its 
provisions  within  thirty  daj's  from  its  passage  ;  second,  to 
promptly  certif}T  to  the  health  officer  for  registration  all  who 
are  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  said  district  at  the 
time  of  passage  of  this  Act  who  apply  therefor  ;  third,  to 
test  the  fitness,  and  pass  upon  the  qualifications,  of  persons 
desiring  to  commence  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  said  district 
after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  and  certify  to  the  health  officer 
for  registration,  such  as  prove,  under  examination  in  theory 
and  practice  of  dentistry,  qualified  in  the  judgment  of  the 
board  to  practice  dentistry  in  said  district ;  fourth,  to  report 
immediately  information  of  any  violation  of  this  Act,  and 
annually  the  transactions  of  the  board  to  the  Commissioners 
of  the  District  of  Columbia  ;  provided,  that  all  graduates  of 
dental  colleges  which  require  a  three  years'  course  of  study 
shall  be  entitled  to  certificates  upon  the  payment  of  certifi- 
cation fee,  and  without  examination  as  to  their  qualifica- 
tions. 

Sec.  4.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  practicing 
dentistry  in  said  district  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this 
Act,  to  make  application  to  said  board,  in  form  prescribed 
by  said  board,  for  certification,  and  present  the  certificates 
thus  obtained  for  registration  to  the  health  officer  within 
sixty  days  from  the  passage  of  this  Act.  Every  such  person 
so  registering  may  continue  to  practice  without  incurring  the 
penalties  of  this  Act. 

Sec.  5.  That  persons  desiring  to  commence  the  practice 
of  dentistry  in  said  district  after  the  passage  of  this  Act, 
shall  first  obtain  a  certificate  of  qualification  from  the  Board 
of  Dental  Examiners,  granted  under  authority  conferred  upon 
said  board  by  Section  3  of  this  Act,  and  present  the  same  to 
the  health  officer  for  registration. 

Sec  6.  That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  health  officer  to 
register  all  persons  presenting  certificates  from  said  board  in 
a  book  kept  for  this  purpose,  and  indorse  upon  each  certificate 
the  fact  and  date  of  such  registration. 


VI  Bl  PPLEMENT. 

Sec.  7.  That  certificates  issued  and  endorsed  under  the 
provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  evidence  of  the  right  of  the 
person  to  whom  granted  to  practice  under  this  Act. 

Sec.  8.  That  any  one  who  shall  practice,  or  attempt  to 
practice  dentistry  in  the  said  district  without  having  com- 
plied  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  be  deemed  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction  thereof  shall  be  fined 
not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  and  in 
default  of  payment  of  such  fine  shall  be  imprisoned  not  less 
than  thirty  nor  more  than  ninety  days;  said  fines,  when  col- 
lected, to  be  paid  into  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States,  to 
the  credit  of  the  District  of  Columbia ;  provided,  that  nothing 
in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  interfere  with  physicians  in 
the  discharge  of  their  professional  duties,  nor  with  students 
pursuing  a  regular  uninterrupted  dental  college  course,  or  in 
bona  fide  pupilage  with  a  registered  dentist. 

Sec  9.  That  to  provide  a  fund  to  carry  out  and  enforce 
the  provisions  of  this  Act,  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners 
may  charge  such  fees,  not  exceeding  one  dollar  for  each  cer- 
tificate, and  ten  dollars  for  each  examination,  as  will  from 
time  to  time,  in  the  opinion  of  said  board,  approved  by  said 
Commissioners,  be  necessary.  From  such  fund  all  expenses 
shall  be  paid  by  the  board  ;  provided,  that  such  expenses  shall 
in  no  case  exceed  the  balance  of  receipts. 

Approved  June  6, 1892. 


CAPE  OF  GOOD  HOPE.— (AFRICA.) 

The  following  rules  regulating  the  registration  of  Dentists  have 
been  formulated  and  adopted  in  the  Colony  of  the  Cape  of 

Good  Hope: 

i 

Section  1.  The  following  rules  have  been  elaborated  and 
adopted  by  the  Colonial  Medical  Council  for  the  registration  of 
dentists,  All  qualifications,  certificates,  diplomas,  degrees  or 
titles  recognized  by  the  General  Medical  Council  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  will  give  the  bearers  thereof  the  right  to 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  vii 

be  registered  as  dentists,  in  accordance  with  Article  18  of  the 
Law  on  Medicine  and  Pharmacy,  1891. 

Sec  2.  Every  person  who  has  practiced  previous  to  the 
22d  of  July,  1878,  desiring  to  be  authorized  and  registered  as 
a  dentist  in  accordance  with  the  above  laws  on  medicine  and 
pharmacy,  must  produce  a  certificate  from  the  General  Medi- 
cal Council  above  mentioned,  and  if  his  name  is  not  found  on 
the  list  published  in  the  Dentists'  Register,  he  must  furnish  the 
Council  with  sufficient  proof  of  evidence  of  his  right  of  regis- 
tration. 

Sec.  3.  The  bearer  of  a  diploma  of  licentiate  of  surgical 
dentistry,  accorded  by  any  medical  authority  in  the  United 
Kingdom,  authorized  to  deliver  such  by  the  law  on  dentists, 
1878,  will  not  be  obliged  to  produce  at  the  same  time  a  cer- 
tificate from  the  General  Medical  Council  above  mentioned  ; 
but  in  this  case  the  Colonial  Medical  Council  reserves  the 
right  to  communicate  with  the  Secretary  of  the  College  which 
has  issued  the  diploma,  to  assure  itself  whether  the  name  of 
the  possessor  is  always  on  the  register  or  the  list  of  said  den- 
tal college  or  university. 

Sec  4.  Any  candidate  may  be  called  before  the  Colonial 
Medical  Council  in  order  to  establish  his  identity  or  prove 
his  qualifications. 

Sec  5.  The  Secretary  will,  from  time  to  time,  address  a 
registered  letter  to  every  registered  practitioner  to  ascertain 
if  he  has  ceased  to  practice,  or  has  changed  his  address,  and 
if  no  answer  is  received  within  six  months,  his  name  will  be 
erased  from  the  register. 

Sec  6.  Any  degree  which  could  be  registered  in  con- 
formity with  Section  1,  and  obtained  after  the  first  inscrip- 
tion, will  be  registered  upon  payment  of  five  shillings. 

Sec  7.  All  affairs  relating  to  dentistry  which  are  pre- 
sented to  the  Colonial  Medical  Council  will,  in  all  cases, 
be  submitted  to  a  dental  member  of  the  Council  for  his 
advice. 


Y111  -I  PPLBMBNT. 

CONNECTICUT. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  tfo  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  State  <>f  Connecticut^  in  general  assembly 
convened,  That  the  Governor  shall  appoint,  on  or  before  the 
first  day  of  July,  1893,  and  biennially  thereafter,  five  persons 
to  be  known  as  Dental  Commissioners,  who  shall  hold  their 
respective  offices  for  two  years  from  the  first  day  of  July  in 
the  year  of  their  respective  appointments,  and  until  their 
successors  shall  have  been  appointed  and  qualified. 

Sec.  2.  No  person  shall  be  appointed  a  Dental  Com- 
missioner who  shall  not  have  been,  for  at  least  ten  years 
previous  to  such  appointment,  a  practitioner  in  dentistry  in 
this  State  and  in  good  standing  in  said  profession. 

Sec.  3.  Said  commissioners  shall  appoint  one  of  their  num- 
ber to  be  their  official  recorder,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  keep 
a  record  of  the  official  proceedings  of  said  commissioners,  and 
copies  of  said  record  certified  by  him  shall  be  legal  evidence. 

Sec.  4.  On  the  request  of  said  commissioners  the  comp- 
troller shall  provide  a  suitable  place  in  the  capitol  at  Hart- 
ford for  all  meetings  of  said  commissioners. 

Sec.  5.  Said  commissioners  shall  meet  in  May  of  each 
3'ear,  and  at  such  other  times  as  they  shall  designate,  for  the 
purpose  of  attending  to  their  duties  as  prescribed  by  this  Act. 

Sec.  6.  Said  commissioners  shall  give  due  notice  of  every 
meeting  to  be  held  by  them  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Act,  by  advertising  the  place  of  their  meetings,  for  two 
weeks  successively,  in  two  of  the  daily  newspapers  published 
in  said  Hartford,  and  before  the  date  of  said  meetings. 

Sec.  7.  Said  commissioners  may  make  such  rules  of 
procedure  for  the  regulation  of  all  matters  of  application 
and  hearing  before  them  as  they  may  think  advisable. 

Sec.  8.  No  person,  unless  he  has  already  commenced  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State  before  the  passage  and 
approval  of  this  Act,  and  shall  be  engaged  in  said  practice 
at  the  said  time,  shall  engage  in  such  practice  in  any  town 
in  this  State,  unless  such  person  shall  have  first  obtained 
from  said  commissioners  a  license  therefor. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  IX 

Sec.  9.  All  applications  for  such  license  shall  be  in 
writing  and  signed  by  the  applicant,  and  no  license  shall 
issue  to  any  person  unless  he  shall  have  received  a  diploma 
or  other  sufficient  certificate  of  honorable  graduation  from 
some  reputable  dental  college  having  a  department  in  den- 
tistry,* and  duly  recognized  by  the  laws  of  the  State  or 
States  wherein  the  same  is  situated,  or  unless  he  shall  have 
spent  as  a  pupil  or  assistant  at  least  three  years  under  the 
instruction  and  direction  of  some  reputable  dentist,  or  unless 
he  shall  have  had  at  least  three  years'  continuous  practice 
as  a  dentist,  which  facts  must  be  shown  to  said  commissioners 
by  sufficient  evidence. 

Sec  10.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  as 
preventing  any  practicing  physician  or  surgeon  from  the 
performance  of  any  operation  in  dentistry  on  any  patient 
under  his  charge.  Nor  shall  any  lawfully  practicing  dentist 
be  prohibited  hereby  from  availing  himself  of  the  services 
of  any  pupil,  student,  or  assistant  employed  by  him  and 
under  his  immediate  supervision. 

Sec.  11.  Every  applicant  for  a  license  shall  be  examined 
by  said  commissioners,  as  to  his  professional  knowledge  and 
skill,  before  such  license  shall  be  granted,  and  they  may 
refuse  to  grant  a  license  where  they  are  satisfied  that  the 
applicant  is  unfit  or  incompetent ;  they  may  for  good  and 
legal  cause  revoke  any  license  that  has  been  granted,  and 
may  prohibit  any  dentist  in  lawful  practice  from  further 
practice,  on  satisfactory  proof  that  such  dentist  has  become 
unfit  or  incompetent  therefor. 

Sec  12.  Cruelty,  incapacity,  unskilfulness,  gross  negli- 
gence, indecent  conduct  toward  patients,  or  any  such  pro- 
fessional misbehavior  as  shows  unfitness  on  the  part  of  the 
dentist,  shall  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  revocation  of  a  license, 
or  prohibition  to  practice  as  above  provided ;  and  whenever 
complaint  shall  be  made  to  any  of  said  commissioners  against 
any  dentist  practicing  in  this  State,  said  commissioners  shall 

•Error.— The  law,  a«  originally  drafted,  reads:  "...    reputable  dental  college 
or  medical  college  having  u  dci>artment  in  dentistry."    It  will  be  changed  at  the  next 
on  '<i  the  Genera]  Assembly. 


X  SUPPLEMENT. 

investigate  the  matter,  and  on  finding  probable  cause  shall 
notify  the  party  complained  of  to  appear  before  them  and 
show  cause  why  he  should  not  be  prohibited,  or  why  his 
license  should  not  be  revoked. 

Sec.  13.  Every  such  notice  shall  be  in  writing,  and 
signed  by  the  Recorder,  and  shall  contain  a  statement  of  the 
causes  for  which  such  prohibition  or  revocation  is  claimed, 
and  shall  specify  the  place  and  time  for  the  hearing,  which 
shall  be  at  least  twelve  days  after  the  service  of  said  notice. 
Said  notice  may  be  served  by  leaving  a  copy  thereof,  attested 
by  the  Recorder,  at  the  place  of  business  of  the  party  com- 
plained of,  or  at  his  last  usual  place  of  abode,  or  by  sending 
the  same  by  mail. 

Sec.  14.  Any  dentist,  who  shall  at  any  hearing  before 
the  commissioners,  either  by  himself  or  by  his  procurement, 
make  any  false  statement  or  misrepresentation  with  intent 
to  deceive  or  mislead  said  commissioners,  shall  thereby  for- 
feit his  license,  or  be  prohibited  from  practice. 

Sec.  15.  Any  dentist  who  is  aggrieved  by  the  action  of 
said  commissioners  in  the  revocation  of  his  license,  or  pro- 
hibition from  his  practice,  may  apply  to  the  superior  court 
or  court  of  common  pleas,  next  to  be  in  session  in  the  county 
in  which  he  resides,  for  a  writ  of  mandamus,  requiring  them 
to  revoke  their  decision,  if  the  same  be  found  on  hearing  to 
have  been  erroneous.  Such  application  for  mandamus  may 
be  served  on  said  commissioners  by  some  proper  officer  or 
indifferent  person,  by  leaving  with  the  Recorder,  or  at  his- 
usual  place  of  abode,  a  true  and  attested  copy  thereof,  within 
twelve  days  after  said  commissioners  shall  have  notified  such 
dentist  of  their  decision. 

Sec  16.  Every  person  applying  for  a  license  shall,  at  the 
time  of  his  application,  pay  to  the  Recorder  a  fee  of  twenty- 
rive  dollars,  and  if  such  applicant  shall  fail  to  obtain  his 
license,  twenty  dollars  shall  be  returned  to  him. 

Sec.  17.  The  Recorder  shall  keep  an  account  of  all  moneys- 
received  by  him  and  shall  annually,  in  November,  render  his 
account  to  the  Comptroller;  and  shall  pay  over  from  the 
moneys  received  by  him  the  necessary  traveling  expenses  of 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  XI 

commissioners,  and  for  necessary  books  and  stationery,  and 
shall  keep  all  riles,  receipts  and  records  in  his  possession,  and 
deliver  the  same  to  his  successors  in  office. 

Sec.  18.  Said  commissioners  shall  make  to  the  Stat 
Board  of  Health  an  annual  report  of  their  proceedings,  in 
such  form  and  at  such  time  as  such  board  of  health  shall 
prescribe. 

Sec  19.  Any  person  who  shall  engage  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  violation  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  lined  not  less  than 
twenty  dollars  nor  more  than  fifty  dollars  for  each  offense ;. 
and  the  unlawful  practice  of  dentistry  for  one  week  or  part 
of  a  week  shall  be  deemed  a  separate  offense. 

Sec  20.  Sections  2,024  and  2,025  of  the  general  statutes 
are  hereby  repealed. 

In  effect  July  1,  1893. 


MISSISSIPPI. 

Section  1.  Every  person  who  desires  to  practice  dentistry 
in  the  State  of  Mississippi  must  obtain  a  license  to  do  so  as 
hereinafter  provided. 

Sec  2.  A  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  is  hereby  created, 
to  consist  of  five  practicing  dentists,  who  shall  be  appointed 
by  the  Governor,  and  whose  term  of  office  shall  expire  with 
that  of  the  Governor  appointing  them. 

Sec  3.  Each  person  appointed  as  a  member  of  the  Board 
of  Dental  Examiners  shall  qualify  by  taking  the  oath  pre- 
scribed by  the  Constitution  for  State  Officers,  and  shall  file  a 
certificate  thereof  in  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  State 
within  fifteen  days  after  his  appointment. 

Sec  4.  After  the  members  of  the  Board  of  Dental  Ex- 
aminers have  qualified  they  shall  meet  at  the  capitol  of  the 
State,  in  pursuance  of  a  call  to  be  made  by  the  Governor,  and 
organize  by  electing  a  President  and  Secretary  of  the  board 
from  among  themselves. 

Sec  5.  Every  person  who  desires  to  practice  dentistry 
must  apply,  in  writing,  to  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners 


Xll  SUPPLEMENT. 

for  license  to  do  so ;  and  unless  exempted  by  the  provisions 
of  this  chapter,  must  appear  before  the  board  and  be  exam- 
ined by  it  touching  his  learning  and  skill  in  dentistry,  and 
if  he  be  found  to  possess  sufficient  learning  and  skill  therein, 
and  to  be  of  good  moral  character,  the  board  shall  immedi- 
ately issue  to  him  a  license  to  practice  dentistry,  which  shall 
be  signed  by  each  member  of  the  board  who  attends  the 
examination  and  approves  the  issuance  of  the  license. 

Sec.  6.  The  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  meet  at 
the  capitol  of  the  State  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  April  of  each 
year,  for  the  purpose  of  examining  applicants  for  license  to 
practice  dentistry ;  and  it  shall  continue  in  session  until  all 
applicants  for  license  have  been  examined,  and  their  exami- 
nations have  been  approved  or  disapproved.  All  examina- 
tions, except  as  to  character,  shall  be  upon  written  questions 
and  answers,  and  three  members  of  the  board  are  a  quorum 
for  business. 

Sec.  7.  Applicants  for  license,  who  are  required  to  be 
examined  touching  their  learning  and  skill  in  dentistry, 
must  each  pay  a  fee  of  ten  dollars  to  the  Board  of  Dental 
Examiners,  as  a  condition  precedent  to  examination,  which 
fee  shall  be  distributed  among  the  members  of  the  board  as 
their  compensation,  in  such  proportion  as  the  board  may 
allow. 

Sec  8.  Each  person  now  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  this  State  is  entitled  to  receive  a  license  therefor, 
without  beino;  examined  touching  his  learning  or  skill  in 
dentistry,  if  he  shall  apply  therefor  within  six  months  after 
this  law  becomes  operative,  and  shall  pay  twenty-five  cents 
for  its  issuance.  If  such  application  be  made  within  the 
time  prescribed,  and  the  twenty-five  cents  be  paid,  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  shall  issue  to  the 
applicant  a  license  to  practice  dentistry,  which  shall  be  signed 
in  the  name  of  the  board  by  him  as  Secretary. 

Sec.  9.  Any  member  of  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners 
may  examine  applicants,  orally  or  in  writing,  and  issue  a 
temporary  license  to  them  to  practice  dentistry,  which  shall 
authorize  such  practice  and  be  valid  until  the  next  succeeding 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  Xlil 

meeting  of  the  board.  But  one  temporary  license  shall  ever 
be  issued  to  the  same  applicant. 

Sec.  10.  Every  person  who  receives  a  license  to  practice 
dentistry  must  file  it  for  record  in  the  office  of  the  Clerk  of 
the  Circuit  Court  of  the  county  in  which  he  shall  reside, 
within  thirty  days  after  its  issuance  ;  and  if  he  fail  to  do  so, 
he  shall  thereafter  be  liable  for  practicing  dentistry  without 
license  so  long  as  the  same  shall  remain  unrecorded.  When 
such  license  shall  be  filed,  the  Clerk  shall  record  the  same  in 
the  book  in  which  the  licenses  of  physicians  are  recorded, 
upon  the  payment  to  him  of  the  lawful  fee,  and  when  recorded 
the  original  shall  be  delivered  on  demand  to  the  licensee. 

Sec  11.  If  a  license  to  practice  dentistry  be  issued  and 
become  lost  or  destroyed,  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners 
may  issue  another  in  lieu  of  it,  upon  satisfactory  proof  of  the 
loss  or  destruction. 

Sec  12.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Dental  Exam- 
iners to  cause  its  Secretary  to  keep  a  complete  record  of  its 
acts  and  proceedings,  and  to  preserve  all  papers,  documents 
and  correspondence  received  by  the  board  and  relating  to  its 
duties  and  office. 

Sec  13.  Such  stationery,  blank  books,  and  forms  as  may 
be  needed  by  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  in  the  discharge 
of  its  duties,  shall  be  furnished  to  it  by  the  Board  of  Public 
Contracts. 

Sec  14.  The  Governor  may  remove  any  or  all  of  the 
members  of  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  and  appoint 
another  or  others  in  place  of  such  as  may  be  removed,  and 
may  fill  by  appointment  any  vacancy  that  ma}'  occur  in  the 
board. 

Sec  15.  Physicians  may  extract  teeth  by  virtue  of  their 
license  to  practice  medicine. 

In  effect  Xovember  1,  1892. 


XIV  SUPPLEMENT. 

NEW  MEXICO. 

Section  1.  Be  it  >  nacted  by  th  Legislative  Assembly  of 
the  Territory  of  New  Mexico:  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for 
any  person  who  is  not  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  the  Territory  of  Xew 
Mexico  to  commence  such  practice,  unless  such  person  shall 
have  received  a  certificate  from  the  duly  authorized  Board 
of  Dental  Examiners  hereinafter  provided  for. 

Sec.  2.  A  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five 
practicing  dentists  within  the  Territory  of  Xew  Mexico,  is 
hereby  created,  whose  duty  it  shall  he  to  carry  out  the  pur- 
poses and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  The  members  of 
said  hoard  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Governor.  The  term  for 
which  the  members  of  said  board  shall  hold  their  offices  shall 
be  four  years,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  appointed.  In 
case  of  a  vacancy  occurring  in  the  membership  of  said  board 
such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  appointment  by  the  Governor. 

Sec  3.  The  said  board  shall,  within  sixty  days  after 
their  appointment,  meet  at  the  capitol  of  the  Territory  of 
Xew  Mexico,  and  organize  by  electing  one  of  its  members 
President  and  one  Secretary  thereof.  Said  board  shall  meet 
at  least  once  in  each  year  thereafter,  and  as  often  and  at 
such  times  and  places  as  it  may  deem  proper  and  necessary. 
A  majority  of  said  board  shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quo- 
rum for  the  transaction  of  business. 

Sec  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  who  at  the 
time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act  is  engaged  in  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  the  Territory  of  Xew  Mexico,  within  six  months 
from  the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  Act,  to  cause  his  or  her 
written  application  to  be  tiled  with  the  Secretary  of  said 
board  for  a  certificate  to  continue  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
within  said  Territory;  and  all  persons  whom  the  board  may 
find  to  have  been  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  within 
the  Territory  of  Xew  Mexico  for  the  period  of  one  year  next 
preceding  the  passage  of  this  Act  shall  be  entitled  to  receive 
a  certificate  from  said  Board  of  Examiners  without  further 
examination. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XV 

Sec.  5.  No  person  whose  name  is  not  registered  on  the 
books  of  said  board  as  a  regular  practitioner  of  dentistry, 
within  the  time  prescribed  in  the  next  preceding  section, 
shall  be  permitted  to  practice  dentistry  within  the  Territory 
of  New  Mexico  until  such  person  shall  have  been  duly 
examined  hy  said  board  and  regularly  licensed  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  this  Act;  provided,  farther, 
that  all  persons  presenting  a  diploma  from  a  college  recog- 
nized as  reputable  by  the  National  Association  of  Dental 
Examiners  and  paying  the  sum  of  five  dollars  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  board  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  a  certificate 
without  further  examination. 

Sec  6.  In  order  to  provide  the  means  for  carrying  out 
and  enforcing  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  said  Board  of  Exam- 
iners shall  charge  each  person  applying  for  a  certificate  to 
continue  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  the  sum  of  five  dollars 
for  said  certificate,  and  all  persons  applyingfor  an  examination 
to  procure  a  certificate  to  commence  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry within  the  Territory  of  New  Mexico  shall  pay  to 
the  Secretary  of  said  board,  before  submitting  to  said  exami- 
nation, the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars. 

Sec  7.  Any  person  holding  a  license  from  said  board 
who  shall  be  charged  with  immoral  or  unprofessional  con- 
duct may,  if  found  guilty  as  charged,  upon  proper  investiga- 
tion had  by  said  board,  have  his  or  her  license  revoked  by 
said  board. 

Sec  8.  All  moneys  received  by  the  board  shall  be  held 
by  the  Secretary  thereof  as  a  special  fund  for  paying  the  nec- 
essary expenses  and  for  enforcing  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

The  Secretary  shall  give  to  the  board  a  good  and  suffi- 
cient bond,  to  be  approved  by  said  board,  and  in  an  amount 
to  be  fixed  by  the  board. 

Sec  9.  No  part  of  the  salary  or  other  expenses  of  said 
board  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  Territorial  treasury. 

Sec  10.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  of  the  board 
to  make  an  annual  report  to  the  Governor  of  the  Territory, 
;it  such  times  as  may  be  directed  by  the  board,  and  such  report 
shall  be  Bigned  and  approved  by  the  President  of  the  board. 


XVI  SUPPLEMENT. 

Sec.  11.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  upon  conviction  thereof  may  be  fined  not  less  than 
twenty  dollars  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  he 
imprisoned  in  the  county  jail  not  less  than  one  month  nor 
more  than  three  months,  or  by  both  fine  and  imprisonment, 
in  the  discretion  of  the  court  trying  said  cause. 

Sec.  12.  Any  justice  of  the  peace  of  the  county  in  which 
such  violation  was  committed  shall  have  jurisdiction  in  all 
cases  of  violations  of  this  Act,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  respective  county  attorneys  to  prosecute  all  violations  of 
this  Act. 

Sec  13.  Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  inter- 
fere with  physicians  and  surgeons  in  their  practice  as  such. 

Sec  14.  This  Act  shall  be  in  force  from  and  after  its 
passage. 

In  effect  February  23,  1893. 


NEW  YORK. 

AMENDMENT. 

Section  1.  The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  repre- 
sented in  Senate  and  Assembly,  do  enact  as  follows,  That  no 
person  shall  practice  dentistry  either  as  principal,  agent, 
assistant  or  employe  in  the  State  of  New  York,  or  advertise 
or  hold  himself  out  to  the  public  as  so  practicing  dentistry, 
who  shall  not  be  licensed  and  registered  as  prescribed  by 
this  Act.  Any  person  who  shall  practice  dentistry,  or  adver- 
tise, or  hold  himself  out  to  the  public  as  practicing  dentistry 
in  violation  of  this  section,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  upon  a  first  conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a 
fine  of  not  less  than  fifty  dollars ;  and  for  every  conviction 
of  said  misdemeanor  subsequent  to  the  first,  the  person  con- 
victed shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  one  hun- 
dred dollars,  or  imprisonment,  or  by  both  fine  and  imprison- 
ment. 

Sec  2.  A  person  only  shall  be  deemed  to  be  licensed  to 
practice  dentistry  in  this  State  who  shall  have  attained  the 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  XVII 

full  age  of  twenty-one  years,  shall  have  had  properly  granted 
to  him  or  her,  either  by  the  Dental  Society  of  the  State  of 
New  York,  or  by  an  incorporated  medical  or  dental  school 
or  college,  approved  by  the  Dental  Society  of  the  State  of 
New  York,  a  proper  diploma  conferring  a  recognized  medi- 
cal or  dental  degree,  and  shall  have  made  the  registration 
required  by  Section  3  of  this  Act ;  provided  farther,  that  no 
diploma  shall  be  deemed  valid  within  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  if  conferred  irregularly,  through  fraud  or  false  represen- 
tation, or  without  substantial  compliance  by  the  person  to 
whom  it  may  have  been  granted,  or  the  corporation  confer- 
ring it,  with  the  general  statutory  requirements  of  this  State 
as  to  course  and  duration  of  preparatory  and  professional 
study,  and  also  with  the  regulations  of  said  State  society  and 
of  the  corporation  conferring  the  diploma  as  to  study,  attend- 
ance, examination  and  character,  or  if  conferred  by  a  school 
or  college  not  recognized  by  said  society  as  reputable  and 
providing  an  adequate  course  of  insi  ruction  and  maintaining 
a  proper  standard  of  attainment,  character  and  attendance ; 
provided,  also,  that  all  persons  lawfully  licensed  and  registered 
at  the  time  this  Act  shall  take  effect,  shall  be  deemed  law- 
fully licensed  and  registered  hereunder,  subject  only  to  the 
provisions  of  Section  3  of  this  Act  as  to  removal  of  practice. 
Sec.  3.  Every  person  practicing  dentistry  in  this  State, 
shall  register  in  the  office  of  the  Clerk  of  the  County  where 
his  place  of  business  is  located,  and  in  the  office  of  the  Clerk 
of  any  County  into  which  he  shall  remove,  or  in  which  he 
shall  "carry  on  his  business,  in  a  book  to  be  prepared  and 
kept  by  the  Clerk  for  that  purpose,  his  name,  age,  office  and 
post-office  address,  legal  authority  for  practicing  dentistry 
in  this  State,  and  the  date  of  such  registration,  which  he 
shall  be  entitled  to  make  only  upon  presenting  to  the  County 
Clerk  a  certificate  from  the  member  of  the  State  Board  of 
Censors  appointed  by  the  State  Dental  Society  for  the  judi- 
cial district  in  which  said  county  is  situated,  to  the  effect 
that  said  applicant  for  registration   has  received  a  proper 
diploma  as  provided  iii  Section  2  of  this  Act,  and  upon  the 
making  by  said  applicant  of  an  affidavit  stating  his  name, 


XV111  SUPPLEMENT. 

age  and  legal  authority  to  practice  dentistry  within  this 
State  Every  such  certificate  of  a  Censor  shall  be  filed  by 
the  County  Clerk  receiving  it,  and  every  person  admitted  to 
registration  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  enti- 
tled, upon  the  payment  of  a  fee  of  fifty  cents  to  the  County 
Clerk,  to  receive  from  that  official  a  certified  transcript  of 
his  registration.  All  the  affidavits  made  in  pursuance  of  the 
provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  preserved  in  a  bound  volume 
by  the  County  Clerk,  in  whose  office  they  are  made;  pro- 
vided, however,  that  all  registrations  lawfully  made  prior  to 
the  taking  effect  of  this  Act,  shall  continue  to  be  as  valid 
and  of  the  same  effect  as  when  made ;  provided,  also,  that 
any  registration  procured  by  fraud  or  false  statement  of  any 
kind  shall  be  deemed  null  and  void;  and  that  the  County 
Clerk,  upon  the  presentation  to  him  of  a  certified  copy  of 
the  judgment  convicting  any  person  of  a  violation  of  the 
provisions  of  the  dental  law,  shall  note  the  fact  and  date  of 
such  conviction  upon  the  registration.  If  any  affidavit  made 
pursuant  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  be  wilfully  false  in 
any  material  regard,  the  affiant  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of 
perjury,  and  punishable  by  imprisonment  for  not  less  than 
two,  nor  more  than  ten  years.  Any  person  who  shall  sell  or 
barter,  or  offer,  either  orally,  in  writing  or  by  printed  adver- 
tisement, to  sell  or  barter,  or  who  shall  by  purchase,  barter, 
fraud,  false  statements,  bribe  or  promise  of  bribe,  and  with. 
out  compliance  with  all  provisions  of  law,  any  diploma  pur- 
porting to  confer  a  medical  or  dental  degree,  or  any  certifi- 
cate, transcript  or  registration  provided  to  be  given  under 
this  Act  or  the  statutes  regulating  the  practice  of  medicine; 
or  who  shall  substitute  on  any  such  diploma,  certificate  or 
transcript  for  the  same  of  the  person  to  whom  the  same  was 
given  or  granted,  the  name  of  a  different  person,  or  shall 
fraudulently  alter  such  diploma,  certificate,  transcript  or 
registration  in  any  material  regard,  and  any  person  who 
shall  use  or  offer  to  use  any  such  diploma,  certificate  or 
transcript  as  a  license  or  color  of  license,  or  means  of  ob- 
taining license  or  registration  as  a  practitioner  of  medicine 
or  dentistry,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XIX 


conviction  thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 
five  hundred  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  for  not  less  than 
six  months,  or  by  both  fine  and  imprisonment  ;  any  person 
who,  without  a  proper  diploma  conferring  the  same,  shall 
assume  the  title  of  Doctor  of  Dental  Surgery,  or  Master  of 
Dental  Surgery,  or  shall  append  to  his  or  her  name  the  letters 
D.D.S.,  or  the  letters  M.D.S.,  or  any  other  letters  specially 
used  by  any  medical  or  dental  college,  school,  board  or 
society  to  indicate  that  the  person  to  whose  name  they  are 
appended  holds  a  recognized  medical  or  dental  degree,  shall 
be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction 
thereof  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty  dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  for  not  less  than 
three  months,  or  by  both  fine  and  imprisonment;  all  fines 
and  forfeitures  of  bail  imposed  and  collected  in  consequence 
of  violations  of  this  Act  shall  be  paid  to  the  Dental  Society 
of  the  State  of  New  York;  provided,  that  if  at  the  annual 
meetings  of  the  said  society  the  Treasurer  shall  report  an 
excess  of  the  sums  so  paid,  over  the  expenses  of  the  society 
enforcing  this  Act,  such  excess  shall  be  paid  over  by  him  to 
the  Treasurer  of  the  State,  and  become  a  part  of  the  common 
school  fund ;  provided,  also,  that  any  such  fine  or  forfeiture  im- 
posed in  an  action  brought  by  an  incorporated  county  medical 
society  for  violation  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  relating  to 
medical  diplomas,  shall  be  paid  to  said  prosecuting  society. 

Sec.  4.  Sections  8, 9  and  10, of  Chapter  152,  of  the  laws  of 
1868,  shall  read  respectively  as  follows : 

Sec  8.  The  State  Dental  Society,  organized  as  afore- 
said, having  already  at  its  first  meeting  appointed  eight 
Censors,  one  from  each  of  the  said  district  societies,  to  con- 
stitute a  State  Board  of  Censors,  divided  into  four  classes,  to 
serve  one,  two,  three  and  four  years,  respectively,  shall  at 
each  annual  meeting  appoint  two  Censors,  to  serve  each  four 
years,  and  until  their  successors  shall  be  chosen,  and  fill  all 
vacancies  that  may  have  occurred  by  death  or  otherwise. 
Each  district  society  shall  be  entitled  to  one,  and  only  one, 
member  of  said  Board  of  Censors.  Said  Board  of  Censors 
-hall  meet  at  least  once  in  each  year,  at  such  time  and  place 


XX  3UPPLEMENT. 

as  they  shall  designate  and,  being  thus  met  they,  or  a 
majority  of  them,  Bhall  carefully  and  impartially  examine  all 
persons  who  are  entitled  to  examination  under  the  provisions 

of  this  Act,  and  who  shall  present  themselves  for  that  pur- 
pose, and  report  their  opinion  in  writing  to  said  State  Dental 
Society,  and  on  the  recommendation  of  the  said  board  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  President  aforesaid  to  issue  a 
diploma  to  such  person  or  persons,  signed  by  the  President, 
the  Secretary  and  said  Censors,  and  bearing  the  seal  of  said 
society,  conferring  upon  him  the  degree  of  "  Master  of  Dental 
Surgery"  (M.D.S.),  and  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  any  other 
society,  college  or  corporation  to  grant  to  any  person  the 
said  degree  of  "Master  of  Dental  Surgery." 

Sec.  9.  The  State  Dental  Society  shall  have  the  power 
to  determine  what  medical  and  dental  colleges  maintain  a 
course  of  education  and  training  adequate  in  duration  and 
standard  to  entitle  their  diplomas  to  be  approved  and  certi  lied 
by  the  Censors,  as  qualifying  their  holders  to  be  licensed  to 
practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  and  so  registered.  Said 
society  shall  admit  to  its  examinations,  provided  for  in  Sec- 
tion 8  of  this  Act,  only  the  following  classes  of  persons,  upon 
satisfactory  proof  of  good  moral  character  : 

First.  All  duly  licensed  and  registered  dentists  of  this 
State. 

Second.  All  persons  coming  from  other  States  or  coun- 
tries who .  shall  present  to  said  society  satisfactory  proof  of 
having  been  lawfully  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry 
without  the  State  for  the  term  of  six  years. 

Third.  All  such  persons  as  shall  have  studied  dentistry 
for  a  term  of  four  years  in  the  office  or  offices  of  some  repu- 
table and  duly  licensed  and  registered  dentist  or  dentists  of 
this  State,  and  shall  have  in  other  respects  conformed  to  the 
regulations  governing  such  examinations,  which  regulations, 
not  inconsistent  with  this  Act,  said  society  may  make  and 
must  publish  at  least  twice  in  each  calendar  year  in  a 
leading  dental  journal.  Every  person  actually  engaged  at 
the  time  this  Act  takes  effect  in  studying  dentistry  under 
private  preceptorship,  as  aforesaid,  must,  within  three  months 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  XXI 

from  the  passage  of  this  Act,  file  with  the  Secretary  of  the 
State  Dental  Society,  a  statement  of  his  or  her  age,  present 
address,  commencement  of  terms  of  study,  and  the  name  and 
address  of  his  or  her  preceptors,  who  shall  also  certify  that 
said  statement,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  himself,  is  true.  Any 
person  beginning  such  a  course  of  study  after  the  Act  takes 
effect  shall  file  a  similar  certificate,  and  until  it  shall  be  made, 
the  term  of  four  years  required  by  the  statute  shall  not  be 
deemed  to  be  commenced.  !N"o  such  student  shall  be  eligible 
for  examination  for  its  diploma  by  said  society,  who  shall  not 
have  filed  one  of  said  certificates,  all  of  which  shall  be  pre- 
served, bound  and  indexed  by  said  Secretary.  Any  wilfully 
false  statement  in  any  such  certificates  shall  preclude  the 
person  making  it  from  the  privilege  of  examination.  The 
Censor  for  each  judicial  district  of  said  society  shall  be  em- 
powered to  examine  any  applicant  for  the  examination  or 
certification  of  diploma  granted  under  this  Act,  as  to  his  or 
her  age,  identity,  course  of  study,  and  if  a  diploma  is  offered 
for  certification,  as  to  the  time,  place  and  circumstance  of 
its  conferment.  In  so  doing,  the  Censors  are  empowered  to 
reduce  the  applicant's  statements  to  the  form  of  an  affidavit, 
and  administer  the  usual  oath  in  respect  thereto,  taken  by 
affiants  as  to  the  truth  of  depositions  in  legal  proceedings. 

Sec.  10.  Every  student,  before  filing  the  certificate  called 
for  by  this  Act,  shall  pay  to  the  Secretary  of  the  said 
State  Society  a  fee  of  five  dollars.  Every  applicant  for  a 
Censor's  certificate  that  his  or  her  diploma  is  approved  by 
said  society  as  entitling  the  holder  to  registration,  shall  pay 
to  the  Secretary  of  said  society,  at  the  time  of  his  application, 
a  fee  of  ten  dollars.  Every  applicant  for  examination  by  the 
Censors  of  said  eociety  shall  pay  to  the  said  Secretary,  at  the 
time  of  his  application,  a  fee  of  thirty  dollars.  Xone  of 
these  fees  shall  be  returned  to  the  applicant,  but  shall  be  paid 
into  the  treasury  of  said  society.  J3ut  any  applicant,  for 
examination  before  said  Censors,  who  may  have  failed  to 
obtain  his  diploma,  may,  for  good  cause  shown,  be  allowed 
thereafter  to  present  himself  for  examination  without  pay- 
ment of  a  further  fee. 


XXI  l  -I  PPLEMENT. 

Sec.  5.  Nothing-  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  punish 
any  person  for  performing  merely  mechanical  work  upon 
inert  matter  in  a  dental  office  or  laboratory;  or  a  registered 
student,  who,  for  purposes  of  clinical  instruction,  in  the 
presence  and  under  the  immediate  supervision  of  his  pre- 
ceptor, may  assist  the  latter  in  dental  operation,  providing 
that  such  student  Bhall  not,  under  the  pretense  of  so  assisting 
a  ]» receptor,  practice  dentistry  by  performing  operations  inde- 
pendently; or  a  duly  licensed  and  registered  physician  and 
surgeon  for  his  lawful  acts  in  the  practice  of  his  profession. 
Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  suspend  or  discon- 
tinue any  prosecution  already  commenced  under  the  laws  in 
force  prior  to  the  taking  effect  of  this  Act,  and  any  violation 
of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  forbidding  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry without  lawful  authority,  committed  by  a  person  who 
shall  have  been  previously  convicted  under  the  laws  of  which 
this  Act  is  a  codification,  in  any  court  within  this  State,  of 
the  misdemeanor  of  practicing  dentistry  without  license  or 
registration,  shall  be  deemed  a  second  offense  within  the 
meaning  of  this  Act;  such  laws  being  to  that  extent  kept  in 
force. 

Sec.  6.  The  following  Acts  are  hereby  repealed:  Chap- 
ters 331  of  the  Laws  of  1870,  540  of  the  Laws  of  1ST'.',  376 
of  the  Laws  of  1881,  280  of  the  Laws  of  1888,  and  337  of 
the  Laws  of  1889. 

Sec.  7.  This  Act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 

Approved  May  12,  1892. 


NEW  ZEALAND. 

An  Act  to  amend  the  Acts  relating  to  Dentists. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  New 
Zealand  in  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the 
same,  as  follows,  The  short  title  of  this  Act  is  "  The  Dent; 
Act,  Amendment  Act,  1891." 

Sec.  2.  Whenever  any  person  is  refused  registration  as  a 
colonial  dentist,  or  as  a  foreign  dentist,  under  the  circum- 
stances mentioned  in  Section.  9  of  "  The  Dentists'  Act,  1880," 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  xxiii 

the  Board  of  Examiners  shall,  on  the  request  of  such  person, 
appoint  a  time  and  place  for  his  examination  under  the  said 
Act  and  the  by  daws  or  regulations  then  in  force  thereunder, 
and  such  examination  shall  take  place  within  thirty  days. 

And  if  such  person  shall  duly  pass  such  examination  in 
dentistry,  he  shall  be  entitled  to  a  certificate  and  to  be  regis- 
tered under  the  said  Act,  and  all  the  provisions  of  the  said 
Act,  so  far  as  applicable,  shall  extend  and  apply  to  the 
case  herein  provided  for  accordingly. 

Sec.  3.  "  The  Dentists'  Act,  1880,  Amendment  Act, 
1881,"  is  hereby  amended  as  follows,  to  wit :  In  line  six  of 
Subsection  1  of  Section  3  thereof,  the  words  "  within  one 
year  "  are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  4.  Wherever  the  word  "Senate"  is  used  in  "The 
Dentists'  Act,  1880,"  or  "The  Dentists'  Act,  1880,  Amend- 
ment Aet,  1881,"  the  words  "  Governor  in  Council  "  shall  be 
read  and  substituted  in  lieu  thereof ;  and  it  is  further  pro- 
vided that  the  Governor  in  Council  shall  appoint  a  Board  of 
Examiners  for  each  of  the  cities  of  Auckland,  Wellington, 
Christchurch,  and  Dunedin,  for  the  purpose  of  conducting 
examinations  and  granting  certificates  under  the  Dentists'  Act 
and  this  Act. 

September  21,  1891. 


OHIO. 

To  Amend  Sections  4-^4-  and  6,991  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of 

Ohio. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Shite  of  Ohio,  That  Sections  4,404  and  6,991  of  the  revised 
statutes  of  Ohio  be  so  amended  as  to  read  as  follows : 

Six.  4,404.  From  and  after  July  4th,  1892,  it  shall  be 
unlawful  for  any  person  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State, 
unless  such  person  shall  have  first  obtained  a  certificate  of 
qualification  issued  by  the  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners 
of  this  State,  as  hereinafter  provided  : 

].  A  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  to  consist  of  five  prac- 
ticing d en tists,  resident  in  this  State,  is  hereby  created,  whose 


xxiv  -i  PPLEMEKT. 

duty  it  shall  be  to  carry  out  the  purposes  and  to  enforce  the 
provisions  of  this  Act.  The  members  of  the  firsl  Board  of 
Dental  Examiners,  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  Governor  of  the  State  on  or  before  the  first 
day  of  May.  1892.  The  term  for  which  members  of  said 
board  shall  be  appointed  shall  be  three  years,  and  until  then- 
successors  shall  be  duly  appointed  and  qualified,  and  no  per- 
bod  shall  be  appointed  for  or  serve  to  exceed  two  terms  in 
succession.  All  vacancies  in  said  hoard,  caused  by  expiration 
of  term,  or  otherwise,  shall  be  filled  by  the  appointment  of 
the  Governor  of  the  State. 

2.  Said  board  shall  have  power  to  make  reasonable  rule- 
and  regulations  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  and  enforcing 
the  provisions  of  this  Act.  It  shall  choose  one  of  its  members 
President,  and  one  Secretary:  and  shall  hold  two  regular 
meetings  in  the  city  of  Columbus,  on  the  last  Tuesday  of  May 
and  November  in  each  year,  and  at  such  other  times  as  may 
be  deemed  necessary  by  said  board.  A  majority  of  said 
board  shall  at  all  times  constitute  a  quorum  thereof  for  the 
transaction  of  business,  hut  a  less  number  may  adjourn  from 
time  to  time.  The  board  shall  keep  full  minutes  of  all  its 
proceedings,  and  a  full  register  of  all  persons  licensed  and 
certified  as  dentists  by  said  board,  which  shall  be  public 
records,  and  at  all  reasonable  times  open  to  inspection  as  such. 
A  transcript  of  any  of  the  entries  in  such  minutes  and  reg- 
ister, certified  by  the  Secretary,  under  the  seal  of  said  board, 
shall,  at  all  times  and  places,  be  competent  evidence  of  the 
facts  therein  stated.  The  members  of  the  board  shall  have 
power  to  administer  oaths,  and  the  board  shall  have  power 
to  hear  testimony-  in  all  matters  relating  to  the  duties  im- 
posed upon  it  by  law. 

3.  Any  and  all  persons  who  shall  desire  to  practice  den- 
tistry in  this  State  after  July  4th,  1892,  except  such  pers.  as 
as  have  been  regularly,  since  July  4th,  1889,  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  or  who  may  hold,  or  may 
hereafter  obtain  diplomas  from  any  reputable  dental  college, 
shall  file  application  in  writing  with  the  Secretary  of  said 
Board  of  Dental  Examiners  for  examination  and  license,  and 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XXV 

at  the  time  of  making  such  application  shall  pay  to  the 
Secretary  of  said  board  a  fee  of  ten  dollars;  and  each  appli- 
cant shall  present  himself  before  said  board  at  its  first  regular 
meeting,  after  filing  his  application  for  examination  by  said 
board.  The  examination  shall  be  of  an  elementary  and  prac- 
tical character,  but  sufficiently  thorough  to  test  the  fitness  of 
the  applicant  to  practice  dentistry.  The  examination  ma}' 
be  written,  or  oral,  or  both,  at  the  option  of  the  board,  and 
shall  include  the  following  subjects,  to  wit:  Anatomy, physi- 
ology, chemistry,  materia  medica,  therapeutics,  metallurgy, 
histology,  pathology,  and  operative,  mechanical  and  surgical 
dentistry.  All  persons  successfully  passing  such  examina- 
tions, or  who  may  legally  hold  diplomas  from  any  reputable 
college  of  the  United  States,  or  an}'  foreign  country,  or  who 
may  have  been  regularly,  since  July  4th,  1889,  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  of  good  moral  character, 
shall  be  registered  and  licensed  by  said  board  as  dentists,  and 
shall  receive  a  certificate  of  such  registration  and  license  duly 
authenticated  by  the  seal  and  signature  of  the  President  and 
Secretary  of  said  board ;  and  in  no  case  shall  the  examination 
fee  be  refunded. 

4.  Every  person  receiving  such  a  certificate  of  registra- 
tion and  license  as  dentist  shall,  before  engaging  in  the  prac- 
tice of  dentistry  in  this  State,  place  and  retain  in  place  while 
engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  such  certifi- 
cate of  registration  and  license  in  a  conspicuous  position  at  his 
place  of  business,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  easily  seen  and  read. 

5.  Every  person  who  may  legally  hold  a  diploma  from 
any  reputable  dental  college  in  the  United  States,  or  any 
foreign  country,  or  who  has  been  regularly,  since  July  4th, 
1889,  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,  shall, 
upon  application  and  payment  of  a  fee  of  two  dollars,  to  the 

ictary  of  said  Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  and  producing 
-ati -factory  and  reasonable  proof  of  the  fact  that  he  holds 
Buch  diploma,  or  has  been  so  engaged  in  the  practice  of  den- 
tistry in  this  State  since  July  4th,  1889,  receive  a  certificate 
of  registration  and  license  i<>  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 
Every  applicant  for  license  to  practice  dentistry  under  the 


XXVI  SUPPLEMENT. 

provisions  of  this  section  shall,  in  person,  by  mail  or  otherwise, 
produce  for  the  inspection  of  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners 
his  diploma,  or  the  affidavits  of  himself  and  two  freeholders, 
stating  that  he  has  been  regularly  engaged  in  the  practiceof 
dentistry  in  this  State,  and  at  what  place  or  places  since  July 
4th,  1889;  and  if  the  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  Bhall,  upon 
inspection  thereof,  find  that  the  applicant  is  legally  qualified 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  to  practice  dentistry  in  This 
State,  the  Secretary  shall,  without  unnecessary  delay,  deliver 
to  the  applicant  a  certificate  of  registration  and  license  to 
practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  or  forward  the  same,  without 
expense  to  the  board,  in  such  manner  as  the  applicant  may 
direct.  The  certificate  of  the  Secretary  of  said  Board  of 
Dental  Examiners,  under  the  seal  of  said  board,  stating  that 
any  person  is,  or  is  not,  a  registered  and  licensed  dentist,  shall 
be  prima  facie  evidence  that  such  person  is,  or  is  not,  entitled 
to  practice  dentistry  in  this  State. 

Sec.  6,991.  All  persons  shall  be  said  to  be  practicing  den- 
tistry within  the  meaning  of  this  Act,  who  shall,  for  a  fee, 
salary,  or  other  reward  paid,  or  to  be  paid,  either  to  himself 
or  to  another  person,  perform  dental  operations  of  any  kind, 
treat  disease  or  leisons  of  human  teeth  or  jaws,  or  attempt  to 
correct  malpositions  thereof.  But  nothing  contained  in  this 
Act  shall  be  taken  to  apply  to  acts  of  bona  fide  students  of 
dentistry  done  in  the  pursuit  of  clinical  advantages  under  the 
direct  supervision  of  a  preceptor  who  is  a  licensed  dentist  in 
this  State,  or  while  in  attendance  upon  a  regular  course  of 
study  in  a  reputable  dental  college,  or  to  the  acts  of  legally 
qualified  physicians  and  surgeons. 

1.  Out  of  the  funds  coming  into  the  possession  of  the 
board  as  above  specified,  the  members  of  said  board  may  each 
receive  a  compensation  in  the  sum  of  five  dollars  for  each  day 
actually  engaged  in  the  duties  of  their  office  as  such  Exam- 
iners ;  and  a  mileage  of  three  cents  per  mile  for  all  distances 
necessarily  traveled  in  going  to  and  coming  from  the  meetings 
of  the  board.  Said  expenses  shall  be  paid  from  the  fees  and 
assessments  received  by  the  board  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act,  and  no  part  of  the  salary  or  other  expenses  of  the  board 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XXY11 

Bhall  ever  be  paid  out  of  the  State  treasury.  All  moneys 
received  in  excess  of  the  said  per  diem  allowance  and  mileage, 
as  above  provided  for,  shall  be  held  by  the  Secretary  of  said 
board  as  a  special  fund  for  other  expenses  of  said  board  and 
carrying  out  provisions  of  this  Act,  he  giving  such  bond  as 
the  board  shall  from  time  to  time  direct. 

2.  Any  person  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  upon  convic- 
tion thereof  may  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars 
nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars,  or  be  confined  not  less 
than  ten  days  nor  more  than  one  month  in  the  county  jail,  or 
both.  All  fines  thus  received  shall  be  paid  into  the  common 
school  fund  of  the  county  in  which  such  conviction  takes 
place.  It  is  hereby  made  the  duty  of  the  prosecuting  attor- 
ney of  each  county  in  the  State  to  prosecute  every  case  to  final 
judgment,  whenever  his  attention  shall  be  called  to  a  violation 
of  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

3.  Any  person  who  shall  knowingly  or  falsely  claim  or 
pretend  to  have  or  hold  a  certificate  of  registration,  or  who 
shall  falsely  and  with  intent  to  deceive  the  public,  claim  or  pre- 
tend tot>e  a  registered  or  licensed  dentist,  not  bein^  such  a  reg;- 
istered  or  licensed  dentist,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor, and  shall  be  liable  to  the  penalties  provided  in  this  Act. 

4.  The  Board  of  Examiners  created  by  this  amended  Act 
may  sue  or  be  sued,  and  in  all  actions  brought  by  or  against 
it,  it  shall  be  made  a  party,  under  the  name  of  the  Board  of 
Dental  Examiners  of  the  State  of  Ohio,  and  no  suit  shall  abate 
by  reason  of  any  change  in  the  membership  of  said  board. 

Sec  2.  Said  original  Sections  4,404  and  6,991,  to  which 
this  is  amendatory  are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  3.  This  Act  shall  take  effect,  and  be  in  force,  from 
and  after  its  passage. 


OHIO  DENTAL  LAW. 


Attorney-General  Richards  has  made  the  following 
decision  regarding  the  construction  of  the  new  law  governing 
the  practice  of  dentistry: 


XXVlll  SUPPLEMENT. 

"The  words,  '  regularly  since  July  4tb,  l^s'.'.  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  in  this  State,'  mean  Bteadily  or 
continuously  engaged  in  Buch  practice,  and  the  practice  of 
dentistry  does  uot  include,  I  take  it,  a  tuna  of  pupilage. 

Then-  is  a  distinction  between  the  study  and  the  practice  of 
dentistry,  just  as  there  is  between  the  study  and  practice  of 
law,  or  the  study  and  practice  of  medicine.  A  person  can- 
not be  said  to  be  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  who  is 
simply  a  pupil,  and  is  not  qualified  to  do  and  does  not  do  the 
work  of  a  dentist  on  his  own  responsibility.  The  Act  itself 
(Section  6,901)  gives  a  good  definition  of  what  constitutes 
the  practice  of  dentistry.  A  person  who  has  been  engaged 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry,  as  above  indicated,  since  the  4th 
of  July,  18*9,  whether  of  age  when  he  began  the  practice 
or  not,  came  within  the  class  of  those  entitled  to  a  certificate 
on  making  the  necessary  proof  and  paying  the  prescribed  fee. 

"A  graduate  of  medicine  must  obtain  the  certificate  of 
your  board  before  engaging  in  the  practice  of  dentistry. 
The  exemption  set  out  in  Section  6,991  applies  to  dental 
operations  performed  by  legally  qualified  physicians  and 
surgeons  in  connection  with  their  practice  of  surgery  and 
medicine.  The  Act  recos-nizes  a  distinction  between  such 
operations  incidental  to  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery, 
and  the  regular  practice  of  dentistry  requiring  a  certificate 
from  your  board. 

"A  physician  who,  in  the  practice  of  his  profession, 
performed  occasional  dental  operations,  cannot  be  said  to 
have  been  regularly  engaged  in  the  practice  of  dentistry,  and 
hence  is  not  entitled  to  a  certificate  to  practice  dentistry 
under  the  time  exemption  of  the  Act. 

"The  provision  of  Section  6,991,  'but  nothing  in  this 
Act  shall  be  taken  to  apply  to  acts  of  bona  fide  students  of 
dentistry,  done  in  pursuits  of  clinical  advantages,  under  the 
direct  supervision  of  a  preceptor,  who  is  a  licensed  dentist  in 
this  State,'  does  not  authorize  such  student  to  be  sent  out  by 
his  preceptor  to  perform  dental  operations  beyond  his  direct 
and  personal  supervision.  The  purport  of  the  law  is  to 
protect  the  public  against  the  work  of  those  unskilled  in 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  XXIX 

dentistry,  by  requiring  proof  of  skill  before  power  to  practice 
dentistry  is  acquired.  It  permits,  however,  the  performance 
of  dental  operations  by  students,  so  they  may  acquire  the 
skill  which  in  time,  on  the  certificate  of  your  board,  will 
admit  them  to  practice,  provided  the  skill  requisite  for  the 
protection  of  the  patient  is  present  in  the  person  of  the 
licensed  dentist  overseeing  the  work." 


ONTARIO. 

An  Act  to  amend  the  Act  respecting  Dentistry  in  Ontario. 

Her  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Legisla- 
tive Assembly  of  the  Province  of  Ontario,  enacts  as  follows: 

Section  1.  Section  3  of  the  Act  respecting  dentistry  is 
repealed,  and  the  following  inserted  in  lieu  thereof: 

Sec.  3.  There  shall  be  a  Board  of  Directors  of  the  said 
Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons,  of  Ontario,  to  be  consti- 
tuted in  the  manner  hereinafter  provided  for  in  this  Act,  and 
referred  to  in  this  Act  as  the  "  Board." 

The  board  shall  consist  of  eight  members,  all  of  whom 
shall  be  members  of  the  said  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons, 
of  Ontario,  who  shall  hold  office  for  two  years,  and  of  whom 
any  four  shall  form  a  quorum. 

One  member  of  the  board  shall  be  elected  from  each  of 
the  electoral  districts,  mentioned  in  schedule  A  to  this  Act, 
by  the  members  of  the  college  resident  in  such  district ;  and 
each  member  of  the  board  shall  be  an  elector  in  the  electoral 
district  he  represents,  and  shall  not  be  a  member  of  the  faculty 
of  the  school  of  dentistry  constituted  under  Section  9  of  the 
said  Act  respecting  dentistry.  When  a  vacancy  occurs  in 
the  representation  of  the  faculty,  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled 
by  the  faculty. 

One  member  of  the  board  Bhall  be  elected  by  and  from 
the  faculty  of  the  school  of  dentistry  constituted  under  Sec- 
tion '.•  of  the  -;ii<l  Act  respecting  dentistry. 

Any  member  of  the  board  may,  at  any  time,  resign  by 
letter  directed  to  the  Secretary,  and  in  the  event  of  *\w\\ 


XXX  SUPPLEMENT. 

resignation,  or  vacancy,  occurring  by  death  or  otherwise,  the 
remaining  membersof  the  board  shall  elect  some  fit  and  proper 
person,  from  among  the  members  of  the  college,  to  fill  the 
vacancy  for  the  remainder  of  the  term,  from  the  members  in 

the  electoral  district  in  which  the  vacancy  occurs. 

Sec.  2.  Section  4  of  the  said  Act  is  repealed,  and  the 
following  inserted  in  lieu  thereof: 

Sec  4.  Elections  of  the  board  shall  be  held  on  the  second 
Wednesday  of  December,  in  every  second  year,  reckoning 
from  the  year  1890  ;  and  the  presenl  Board  of  Directors  shall 
hold  office  until  the  first  meeting  of  the  new  board. 

The  persons  qualified  to  vote  at  such  elections  shall  be 
the  members  of  the  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons,  of 
Ontario,  under  the  provisions  of  the  Acts  respecting  den- 
tistry heretofore  in  force,  or  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act,  and  are  not  in  arrears  in  respect  to  any  fees  payable 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  are  resident  in  the 
Province  of  Ontario. 

The  votes  of  said  elections  shall  be  given  by  closed 
voting  papers  in  the  form  prescribed  in  schedule  "B"  to 
this  Act,  and  shall  be  delivered  to  the  Secretary  of  said 
college  by  registered  letter  before  the  second  Wednesday  in 
December,  in  the  year  in  which  the  election  takes  place. 

The  Province  of  Ontario  shall  be  divided  into  the  seven 
electoral  districts  described  in  schedule  "  A  "  to  this  Act. 

The  manner  of  holding  such  election  shall,  with  respect 
to  the  notification  of  the  electors  of  the  time  and  place  of 
holding  the  election,  the  nomination  of  candidates  therefor, 
the  presiding  officer  thereat,  the  taking  and  counting  of  the 
votes,  the  giving  of  a  ca.st.ing  vote  in  case  of  an  equality  of 
votes,  other  necessary  details  be  determined  by  by-laws  to 
be  passed  by  the  board,  and  in  default  of  such  by-laws  the 
Lieutenant-Governor,  in  Council,  may  prescribe  the  time  and 
manner  of  holding  such  election. 

Every  newly-elected  board  shall  hold  its  first  meeting 
in  Toronto,  on  the  fourth  Tuesday  in  March,  or  at  such 
other  time  as  may  be  fixed  by  the  retiring  board,  and  the 
members  of  such  board  shall  hold  office  until  the  first  meeting 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  XXXI 

of  their  successors.  Special  meetings  of  the  board  shall  be 
railed  by  the  President,  on  the  request  in  writing  of  four 
members  of  the  board. 

Sec  3.  Section  5  of  the  Act  respecting  dentistry  is  repealed. 

Sec.  4.  Subsection  1  of  Section  t>  of  the  said  Act  is 
repealed,  and  the  following  substituted  therefor: 

Every  board  shall  at  its  first  meeting  elect  a  President, 
Treasurer  and  Registrar,  and  shall  appoint  a  Secretary,  who 
shall  reside  in  the  city  of  Toronto,  and  such  other  officers  as 
the  board  may  consider  necessary.  The  Treasurer  and  Sec- 
retary shall  receive  such  remuneration  for  their  services  as 
the  board  may  decide. 

Sec.  5.  Section  11  of  the  said  Act  is  amended  by  strik- 
ing out  the  words  "before  the  board"  and  adding  to  the 
section  the  words :  "  and  to  fix  and  determine  the  conditions 
upon  which  dentists  residing  elewhere  than  in  Ontario,  and 
students  and  graduates  from  other  dental  colleges  may  be 
admitted  to  membership  in  the  Royal  College,  of  Dental 
Surgeons,  of  Ontario." 

Sec  6.  Each  member  of  the  college  engaged  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  in  the  Province  of  Ontario  shall  pay  to 
the  Treasurer,  or  to  any  person  deputed  by  the  Treasurer,  to 
receive  the  same  on  or  before  the  first  day  of  November  of 
each  year,  such  annual  fee  as  may  be  determind  by  by-laws 
of  the  board,  not  less  than  one  dollar  nor  more  than  three 
dollars  toward  the  general  expenses  of  the  college,  and  such 
fee  shall  be  recoverable  with  costs  by  suit  in  the  name  of 
the  Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons,  of  Ontario,  in  the 
Division  Court  having  jurisdiction  where  the  member  so  in 
default  resides,  and  such  member  shall  not  be  entitled  to 
recover  in  any  court  for  any  services  rendered  in  the  practice 
of  dentistry  while  so  in  default ;  but  no  funds  collected  under 
this  section  shall  be  disbursed  otherwise  than  for  the  expenses 
o  It  1 )  e  board  and  the  enforcement  of  the  penal  clauses  of  thi  s  Act. 

SCHEDULE   "A." 

(Section  2.) 
Electoral  District  No.  1  shall  be  composed  of  the  follow- ' 
ing   counties:      Addington,   Carleton,    D  midas,    Frontenac, 


xxxii  81  PPLEMENT. 

Glengarry,  Lenark,  Leeds,  Lennox,  Prescott,  Russell,  Ren- 
frew, Rtormont,  <  Irenville. 

Electoral  Districl  X<>.  2  shall  consisl  of  the  following 
counties:  Algoma,  Durham,  Bastings,  NTipissing,  North- 
umberland,  lyiuskoka,  <  )ntario,  Prince  Edward,  Parry  Sound, 
Petersboro,  Victoria,  York,  except  Toronto. 

Electoral  District  No.  3  shall  consist  of  the  city  of  Toronto. 

Electoral  District  No.  4  shall  consist  of  the  following 
counties:  Ilalton,  Dufferin,  Lincoln,  Peel,  Simcoc,  Went- 
wortli,  Welland. 

Electoral  District  No.  5  shall  consist  of  the  following 
counties:  Brant,  Elgin,  Haldimand,  Norfolk,  Oxford,  Wa- 
terloo. 

Electoral  District  No.  G  shall  consist  of  the  following 
counties:     Grey,  Bruce,  Huron,  Wellington. 

Electoral  District  No.  7  shall  consist  of  the  following 
counties  :     Essex,  Kent,  Lambton,  Middlesex,  Perth. 

SCHEDULE  "  B." 

{Section  2.) 

Election  18 
Electoral  District  No. 

I,  of  the  of 

in  the  county  of  member  of  the 

Royal  College  of  Dental  Surgeons,  of  Ontario,  do  hereby  de- 
clare: 

1.  That  the  signature  affixed  hereto  is  my  proper  hand- 
writing. 

2.  That  I  am  a  voter  in  the  Electoral  District  No.  , 
and  that  I  vote  for                          of  the                of 

in  the  county  of  a  member  of  the  Royal  College 

of  Dental  Surgeons,  of  Ontario,  and  an  elector  in  said  electoral 
district,  to  be  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the 
college  for  the  said  district. 

3.  That  I  have  not  in  this  election  signed  any  other 
voting  paper,  and  that  this  voting  paper  was  executed  on  the 
day  of  the  date  thereof. 

Witness  my  hand  this  day  of  A.  D.  18 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XXXlli 

SUPPLEMENT   TO   DENTAL    LAW   OF 
PENNSYLVANIA. 

An  Act  nailing  it  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in  the 
practice  or  assume  the  title  of  Doctor  of  Dental  Surgery,  or 
advertise  himself  as  a  Doctor  of  Dental  Surgery,  without 
first  procuring  a  Diploma  from  a  reputable  institution 
recognized  by  the  National  Board  of  Dental  Examiners, 
and  defining  who  shall  be  understood  as  practicing  Den- 
tistry, and  authorizing  State  Board  of  Dented  Examiners 
to  charge  and  collect  certain  fees. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania  in  general 
assembly  met,  and  it  is  hereby  enacted  by  the  authority  of  the 
same,  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act  it  shall 
not  he  lawful  for  any  person  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  to 
engage  in  the  practice  of  dentistry  or  assume  the  title  of 
doctor  of  dental  surgery,  or  advertise  himself  or  herself  as  a 
doctor  of  dental  surgery,  without  first  having  graduated  and 
receiving  a  diploma  conferring  the  degree  of  doctor  of  dental 
surgery  or  other  recognized  dental  degree  from  a  reputable 
institution  recognized  as  of  good  repute  by  the  National 
Board  of  Dental  Examiners  and  legally  competent  to  confer 
the  same,  and  having  said  diploma  indorsed  by  the  State 
Board  of  Dental  Examiners  and  recorded  according  to 
requirement  of  the  Act  of  June  20th,  1883  ;  provided,  that 
physicians  and  surgeons  may  in  the  regular  practice  of  their 
profession  extract  teeth  for  the  relief  of  pain  or  make  appli- 
cations for  such  purpose. 

Sec  2.  Every  person  shall  be  understood  as  practicing 
dentistry  within  the  meaning  of  this  Act  who  shall  for  fee, 
salary  or  other  reward,  either  to  himself  or  another  person, 
operate  upon  human  teeth,  furnish  artificial  substitutes,  or 
perform  those  acts  as  assistant  or  principal  usually  under- 
stood as  and  called  dental  operations;  provided,  that  bona 
fide  Students  of  dentistry,  under  the  immediate  supervision 
of  a  preceptor  who  is  in  lawful  practice,  may  assist  him 
in  operations  during   the  usual    term   of   pupilage,    not   to 


xxxiv  SUPPLEMENT. 

exceed  two  and  one-halt'  years  from  the  date  of  commence- 
ment. 

Sec.  3.  The  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  is  hereby 

authorized  to  collect  a  fee  of  not  less  than  one  dollar  for 
each  indorsement  of  a  diploma  required  by  the  Act  of  June 
20th,  1883;  said  amount  to  be  paid  by  the  holder  of  diploma 
as  a  prerequisite  to  indorsement.  In  all  eases  the  members 
of  the  State  Dental  Examining  Board  shall,  by  written  or 
oral  examination  or  otherwise,  satisfy  themselves  as  to  the 
fitness  and  qualifications  of  the  holder  of  a  diploma  before 
indorsement  is  made,  and  in  their  discretion  refuse  to  indorse 
the  diploma  of  an  applicant  who  is  found  incompetent. 

When  an  examination  is' considered  necessary,  the  said 
board  is  authorized  to  collect  from  the  applicant  a  fee  of 
five  dollars,  which  sum  shall  be  refunded  in  case  his  diploma 
is  not  indorsed. 

Sec.  4.  In  case  a  graduate  of  one  of  the  dental  schools 
of  this  State  shall  desire  and  intend  to  begin  the  practice  of 
dentistry  in  a  foreign  country  beyond  the  bounds  of  the 
United  States,  and  shall  make  affidavit  duly  certified  as  to 
the  fact,  and  shall  ask  for  the  indorsement  of  the  State 
Board  of  Dental  Examiners,  then  said  State  Board  being 
satisfied  as  to  the  character  and  rpualifications  of  the  appli- 
cant and  the  good  repute  of  the  institution  issuing  said 
diploma,  may  indorse  the  same,  and  for  each  such  indorse- 
ment shall  collect  a  fee  of  not  less  than  ten  dollars. 

Sec.  5.  Any  violation  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall 
constitute  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  subject  the  party  violat- 
ing it  to  a  penalty  of  not  more  than  one  hundred  dollars  for 
each  offense. 

Sec  6.  This  Act  shall  not  apply  to  persons  who  have 
been  engaged  in  the  active  practice  of  dentistry  in  Pennsyl- 
vania from  the  date  of  the  passage  of  this  Act  of  June  20th, 
ISS3. 

Sec.  7.  It  shall  not  be  L.wful  for  any  Recorder  to  place 
upon  record  any  diploma  of  date  later  than  September  20th, 
1883,.  unless  said  diploma  has  been  indorsed  and  approved 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  XXXV 

by  the  State  Board  of  Dental  Examiners  or  the  Secretary  of 
said  board. 

Sec.  8,  All  Acts  or  parts  of  Acts  inconsistent  with  the 
provisions  of  this  Act  are  hereby  repealed. 


SWITZERLAND. 


Lairs  regulating  the  practice  of  Medicine,  Surgery,  Dentistry 
and  Pharmacy  in  the  Canton  of  Geneva. 

Article  1.  No  person  can  exercise  in  the  canton  of 
Geneva  the  professions  of  doctor,  surgeon,  pharmacist,  veter- 
inarian, dentist,  or  midwife,  if  he  is  not  authorized  by  the 
State  Council.  The  authorization  of  the  State  Council  will 
be  accorded  only  upon  an  examination  of  qualification,  or 
upon  presentation  of  official  titles  or  diplomas,  giving  the 
applicant  the  right  to  practice  his  profession  in  the  country 
where  they  were  obtained,  and  on  condition  that  these  diplo- 
mas be  recognized  as  valid  by  the  State  Council. 

Art.  2.  The  scope,  form  and  mode  of  examinations  for 
qualifications  will  be  determined  by  the  regulations  of  the 
State  Council. 

Art.  3.  In  case  of  refusal  of  such  authorization,  the 
decision  of  the  State  Council  must  state  the  reasons. 

Art.  4.  Doctors,  surgeons,  pharmacists,  veterinarians, 
dentists,  and  midwives,  exercising  legally  their  professions 
in  the  adjacent  States,  and  domiciled  in  the  neighborhood  of 
frontiers,  are  allowed  to  practice  in  the  parishes  of  the  cantons 
near  their  residences.  This  privilege  may  be  withdrawn  indi- 
vidually by  a  justified  order  of  the  State  Council. 

Art.  5.  A  special  register  of  authorizations  shall  be 
kept  in  the  Departments  of  Justice  and  Police. 

Art.  6.  An  abstract  of  this  register  shall  be  delivered 
by  the  State  Council  to  all  persons  authorized  to  practice  the 
above  indicated  professions. 

A  list  of  said  persons,  with  their  addresses,  shall  be  ex- 
hibited in  all  i\v\\<i  stores,  station-houses,  bath-houses,  and  in 
such  | 'hens  as  may  be  useful. 


xxxvi  -i  1'I'i.i;.mi:nt. 

Aim.  6.  Any  violation  of  this  law,  or  its  regulative  exe- 
cutions^ will  l)c  punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding  I  wo  hundred 
francs  for  the  first  offense,  and  four  hundred  franca  for  the 
second.  This  penalty  is  independent  of  the  more  serious 
penalties  for  offenses  or  crimes  foreseen  in  the  laws. 

In  effeel  March  23,  1892. 


VIRGINIA. 

An  Act  to  diih  ml  mid  re-enact  Sections  1,7G7  and  1,774-. 

As  amended  and  re-enacted  by  an  Aet  entitled  "An 
Act  approved  January  28,  1890,  entitled  'An  Act  to 
amend  and  re-enact  Sections  1,707  and  1,774  of  Chapter  7'.1. 
Code  of  Virginia,  relating  to  the  practice  of  dentistry,' ;: 
approved  March  2,  1894. 

Be  it  enacted  l>y  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia,  That 
Sections  1,769  and  1,772  of  the  Code  of  Virginia,  and  also 
Sections  1,767  and  1,774  of  said  code,  as  amended  and  re- 
enacted  by  an  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  amend  and  re-enact 
Sections  1,767  and  1,774  of  Chapter  79,  Code  of  Virginia, 
relating  to  the  practice  of  dentistry,"  be  amended  and  re- 
enacted  so  as  to  read  as  follows : 

Section  1,767.  From  and  after  the  passage  of  this  Act, 
it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in  the  practice 
of  dentistry  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Virginia,  or  to  assist 
in  the  practice  of  dentistry  as  either  assistant  or  employe, 
or  to  receive  license  from  any  commissioner  of  revenue, 
unless  such  person  has  graduated  and  received  a  diploma 
from  the  faculty  of  a  reputable  institution  where  this 
specialty  is  taught,  and  chartered  under  the  authority  of 
some  one  of  the  United  States,  recognized  as  of  good  repute 
by  the  Board  of  Examiners,  duly  appointed  under  the 
provisions  of  Section  1,768  of  this  chapter,  and  shall  have 
obtained  a  certificate  from  said  Board  of  Examiners,  as 
provided  in  Section  1,769  of  said  chapter;  provided,  that 
persons  who  held  license  to  practice  dentistry  in  this  Com- 
monwealth   on    the    28th    day  of  January,  1890,  and    have 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XXXV11 

complied  with  the  requirements  of  Section  1,774,  shall  be 
otherwise  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  this  section  ;  and 
provided  farther,  that  nothing  contained  in  this  section  shall 
prevent  any  authorized  physician  or  surgeon,  or  other  person, 
from  extracting  teeth  for  any  one  suffering  from  toothache. 
Section  1,769.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  board  : 
First.  To  meet  annually  at  the  time  and  place  of  meet- 
ing of  the  Virginia  State  Dental  Association,  or  at  such 
other  time  or  place  as  the  board  shall  agree  upon,  to  conduct 
the  examination  of  applicants.  They  shall  also  meet  for  the 
same  purpose  at  the  call  of  any  four  members  of  the  board, 
at  such  time  and  place  as  may  be  designated  by  said  mem- 
bers. Thirty  days'  notice  of  the  meetings  shall  be  given  by 
advertising  in  at  least  two  of  the  daily  papers  published  in 
the  State. 

Second.  To  grant  a  certificate  of  ability  to  practice  den- 
tistry to  all  applicants  who  undergo  a  satisfactory  examina- 
tion, and  receive  at  least  four  affirmative  votes,  which 
certificates  shall  be  signed  by  the  members  of  the  board,  and 
be  stamped  with  a  suitable  seal  (which  they  may  adopt). 

Third.  To  keep  a  book  in  which  shall  be  registered  the 
name  and  qualification  (as  far  as  practicable)  of  every  person 
to  whom  such  certificate  is  granted. 

Fourth.  Any  member  of  the  board,  designated  by  the 
President  thereof,  may,  upon  presentation  by  any  applicant 
of  the  evidence  of  the  necessary  qualifications  to  practice 
dentistry  under  this  chapter,  grant  a  temporary  license  to 
practice  until  the  next  meeting  of  the  board,  and  no  longer; 
■provided,  that  no  such  temporary  license  shall  be  granted  to 
any  person  who  has  been  rejected  on  an  examination  by  the 
board.  All  such  temporary  licenses  shall  be  signed  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Board. 

SECTION  1,772.  Any  person  who  shall,  in  violation  of 
this  chapter,  practice  dentistry  in  this  State,  shall,  on  con- 
viction thereof,  be  fined  not  less  than  fifty  nor  more  than 
two  hundred  dollars,  and  shall  not  be  entitled  to  any  fee  for 
services  rendered,  and  if  a  fee  shall  have  been  paid,  the 
patient   may  recover  back   the  same.     <)n   the  trial  of  any 


XXXV111  81  PPLEMENT. 

person  charged  with  the  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions 
of  this  chapter,  it  shall  be  incumbent  on  the  defendant  to 
show  that  he  has  authority  under  the  law  to  practice  den- 
tistry in  this  State,  in  order  to  relieve  himself  from  the 
penalties  herein  prescribed. 

Any  commissioner  of  the  revenue  who  shall,  in  violation 
of  Section  1,767,  issue  a  lieense  to  any  person  not  authorized 
to  practice  dentistry  by  this  chapter,  shall,  upon  conviction 
thereof,  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty  nor  more  than  fifty 
dollars,  and  no  license  issued  by  any  commissioner,  in  viola- 
tion of  this  chapter,  shall  be  valid. 

Section  1,774.  Every  person  practicing  dentistry  in  the 
Commonwealth  of  Virginia  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of 
this  Act,  shall  register  his  name  and  post-office  address, 
together  with  the  name  of  the  college  from  which  he  is  a 
graduate,  or  the  length  of  time  he  has  been  practicing  in  this 
Commonwealth,  with  the  Board  of  Examiners  before  renew- 
ing his  license,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  to  issue 
to  each  person  so  registered,  a  certificate  of  registration, 
stamped  with  the  seal  of  the  board,  but  no  fee  shall  be 
collected  from  persons  so  registering. 

Eveiy  person  holding  a  certificate  of  qualification  or 
registration  from  the  Board  of  Examiners  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  this  Act,  shall,  within  sixty  days  therefrom,  have 
his  certificate  recorded  in  the  clerk's  office  of  the  county  or 
corporation  court  of  every  county  or  city  in  which  he  pro- 
poses to  practice,  and  if  in  the  city  of  Richmond,  in  the 
office  of  the  Clerk  of  the  Chancery  Court  of  said  city, 
and  every  person  who  shall,  after  the  passage  of  said  Act, 
obtain  such  certificate  from  the  board,  shall  have  said  certi- 
ficate recorded  in  the  same  manner  within  sixty  days  after 
receiving  the  same,  and  before  receiving  a  lieense  from  any 
commissioner  of  the  revenue. 

The  certificate  shall  be  recorded  in  a  book  kept  for  the 
purpose,  and  properly  indexed. 

The  clerk's  fee  for  recording  such  a  certificate  shall  be 
fifty  cents. 

This  Act  shall  be  in  force  from  its  passage,  March  7, 1894. 


DENTAL     JURISPRUDENCE.  XXXIX 

WYOMING. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
Wyoming,  That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  prac- 
tice dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  the  State  of  Wyoming 
without  first  having  received  a  diploma  from  a  reputable 
dental  college  or  university,  duly  incorporated  or  established 
under  the  laws  of  some  one  of  the  United  States  or  some 
foreign  government,  which  is  recognized  as  such  by  the  Na- 
tional Association  of  Dental  Examiners;  -provided,  that 
nothing  in  Section  1  of  this  Act  shall  apply  to  any  bona  fide 
practitioner  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this  State  at 
the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  Act;  and  provided,  that 
nothino-  in  this  Act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  prevent  physi- 
cians  or  surgeons  from  extracting  teeth. 

Sec.  2.  Every  person  who  shall  hereafter  engage  in  the 
practice  of  dentistry  or  dental  surgery  in  this  State  shall  file 
a  copy  of  his  or  her  diploma  with  the  County  Clerk  of  the 
county  in  which  he  or  she  resides,  which  copy  shall  be  sworn 
to  by  the  party  filing  the  same ;  and  the  Clerk  shall  give  a 
certificate  with  the  seal  of  the  county  attached  thereto,  to 
such  party  filing  the  copy  of  his  or  her  diploma,  and  shall 
file  or  register  the  name  of  the  person,  the  date  of  the  filing, 
and  the  nature  of  the  instrument,  in  a  book  to  be  kept  by 
him  for  that  purpose. 

Sec.  3.  Every  bona  fide  practitioner  of  dentistry  or  den- 
tal surgery  residing  in  this  State  at  the  time  of  the  passage 
of  this  Act,  and  desiring  to  continue  the  same,  shall,  within 
sixty  days  after  the  passage  of  this  Act,  file  an  affidavit  of 
said  facts  as  to  the  length  of  time  he  or  she  has  practiced  in 
this  State,  with  the  County  Clerk  of  the  county  in  which  he 
or  she  resides ;  and  the  said  Clerk  shall  register  the  name  of 
and  give  a  certificate  to  the  party  filing  the  affidavit,  in  like 
manner  and  of  like  effect  as  hereinbefore  provided. 

Sec.  4.  All  certificates  issued  under  the  provisions  of 
this  act  shall  be  -prima  facie  evidence  of  the  right  of  the 
holder  to  practice  under  this  Act. 


xl  SUPPLEMENT. 

Sec.  5.  Every  person  violating  the  provisions  of  this  Aci 
shall,  upon  conviction  thereof,  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor,  and  be  punished  by  a  tine  of  not  less  than  fifty  dol- 
lars nor  more  than  two  hundred  dollars,  for  each  and  every 
offense,  or  be  imprisoned  in  the  county  jail  for  sixty  days,  or 
both  tine  and  imprisonment,  at  the  discretion  of  the  court  -.and 
all  tines  collected  shall  belong  to  and  be  paid  into  the  common- 
school  funds  of  the  county  where  the  offense  was  committed. 

Sec.  6.  Any  person  who  shall  have  filed  his  or  her  affi- 
davit or  diploma,  as  required  in  Sections  2  and  3  of  tins  Act, 
in  one  county,  and  remove  to  another  county,  shall,  before 
entering  upon  the  practice  of  his  or  her  profession  in  such 
last-named  county,  procure  a  certified  copy  of  the  record  of 
his  or  her  former  registry,  and  cause  such  transcript  to  be 
tiled  and  recorded  in  the  dental  register  of  such  county  in 
which  he  or  she  has  removed. 

Sec  7.  Tins  Act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  passage. 

In  effect  February  18,1- 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  457 


GENERAL   INDEX. 

Affidavit  at  defense,  the  law  of,  in  Pennsylvania 110,  111 

American  Hard  Rubber  Co.  v.  J.  R.  Dillingham 188 

Anaesthesia,  cause  of,  fatality  from , 69 

civil  and  criminal  prosecution  instituted — the  character 69 

comment  of  Dr.  Litch  on  the  fatality  of 75,     76 

the  action  of  shocks  on  the  nervous  system  while  under 73,     74 

when  incomplete,  may  cause  death  by  shock 73 

Anaesthetics,  administration  of,  when  prolonged,  demands  the  presence  of 

an  assistant 81 

in  dentistry,  assistant  usually  not  required 81,     82 

examination  of  patients  before  the  administration  of 70 

injuries  and  deaths  from,  the  case  of  Bogle  v.  Winslow 71,  72,     73 

legal  inquiry  as  to  the  responsibility  in  cases  of  deaths  or  injuries 

from 70,     71 

legal  requirements  in  the  administration  of 69,  70,     74 

legal  rights  of  dentists  in  the  administration  of 35,     36 

statistics  of  the  fatality  of .» 75 

status  of  dentists  in  France,  in  the  administration  of 68,     69 

the  comparative  fatality  of 74,  75,     80 

Appointments,  case  tried  in  Chicago  court 105 

the  failure  to  keep,  in  dispute,  case  of  Smith  v.  Tathani 104,  105 

the  right  to  charge  for,  when  not  kept 104 

the  rule  as  stated 104 

the  views  of  the  courts  on 104 

Artificial  teeth,  held  as  security  when  fees  are  not  paid 107 

husband  liable  for  payment  when  the  wife  is  furnished  with 168 

Assistant,  cannot  imitate  signs  and  cards  of  his  employer 121 

clauses  in  statutes  relating  to 119 

must  possess  a  diploma 120 

dentist  can  recover  for  the  services  of. 120 

"      liable  for  injury  to  patients  by 121 

"      liable  for  the  contracts  of 120 

"      liable  for  goods  or  materials  ordered  by 120,  121 

restraining  of,  from  practicing  in  same  locality  as  former  employer, 

121,  122 

Bacon  v.  Hill 188 

"      v.  Wait 189 

Beale,  Dr.,  pardon  of '.'7 

Bills,  difficulties  attending  the  collection  of Ill 

the  case  of  Ambrose  White Ill 

Book  accounts,  to  be  legal,  entries  must  be  made  on  same  day 109,  110 

method  of  keeping 109,  110 


458  INDKX. 

Bridge  dentures,  claims  granted  J.  E.  Low  in  patents  on 178,  179,  181 

claims  and  specifications  in  Low  patent  for 179 

continuous  band,  use  of  in  dentistry 17<j 

definition  of  the  method  of 177 

«rror  of  supposition  that  all  patents  are  infringed  by  those  granted 

Low  on 178 

explanation  of  the  principle  of. 177 

interpretation  by  author  of,  patents  on 177(  182 

mechanical  requirements  of  a  continuous  band  used  in  the  construction 

of 180 

no  dependence  on  the  gum  beneath  by  the  methods  of  Eliot  and  Bing 

in  permanent  fastening  of 181 

•opinion  of  the  author  as  to  the  actual  novelty  involved  in  the  method 

of,  patented  by  Low 1 81 

•permanent  cementing  of,  not  novel 180 

specification  of,  granted  Low 179 

teeth  cut  away  at  the  back,  formerly  used  in  the  construction  of.. . . .   181 

the  method  of  the  construction  of,  by  Eliot 178 

"  "  "  "   by  Bing  178 

the  principle  of 177 

the  use  of  continuous  bands  in,  not  invention 179,  180 

"         "      many  years  prior  to  the  present  time 177 

"         "      without  infringement 178,  179 

•Cocaine,  accidents  from  the  use  of. 65 

"        citation  of  cases 98 

legal  requirements  to  be  observed  in  the  administration  of 67 

liability  of  dentists  in  the  administration  of 65 

merits  of. 64 

production  of  erotic  sensations  by 98 

symptoms  of  poisoning  by 64 

the  case  of  West  v.  Maloney 65,     66 

the  poisoning  of  Jeanne  Delcambre,  by 67,     68 

'the  variable  doses  of 65 

.toxic  effects  of. 64 

•warning  to  dentists  administering 99 

Contracts  between  preceptor  and  pupil 114,  119 

case  of  Simonds  v.  Henry 100,  101 

definition  of  Express 99 

"  Implied 99 

dentists  not  liable  for  more  than  ordinary  skill  under 100 

for  compensation  for  services,  may  be  express  or  implied 99 

fraud  will  cause  to  be  declared  void 103 

in  restraint  of  trade,  essentials  to  the  validity  of J  22 

of  dentist  and  patient,  usually  implied 99 

plea  of  defense  to  avoid 100 

the  agreements  under  Implied 100,  102,  103 

the  case  of  Allen  v.  I  hivis. 103,  104 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  459 

Contracts,  the  case  of  Cook  v.  Johnston 123 

"         "      Horner  v.  Graves 122,  123 

"         "      Potter  v.  Wiggins 101,  102 

the  consideration  of  the  compensation  for 123 

Contributory  negligence,  a  good  defense  for  damages  for  personal  injury..     59 

doctrine  of,  as  applied  to  dentistry 57 

illustration  of 57 

legal  case  of,  Kichmond  Tooth  Crown  Company  v.  Pommer 57,     58 

the  patient  guilty  of,  when  advice  of  dentist  is  disregarded 56,     57 

the  importance  of,  in  malpractice  suits 56,    57 

Crown  and  bridge,  a  legal  interpretation  of  patents  on 164 

opinion  of  the  author  on 164 

C'ummings,  J.  A.,  patent  of,  on  dental  vulcanite 188  189 

Damages,  amount  recoverable  varies,  and  is  decided  by  jury 59 

if  excessive,  verdict  of  jury  can  be  set  aside 59 

in  civil  suits 38 

plaintiff  can  recover  only  for  actual  suffering  produced  by  the  neglect,     59 

recoverable  for  "  mental "  suffering 59 

various  circumstances  considered  in  estimating  the  amount  of 59 

Degree  of  D.  D.S.,  protection  afforded  by 33,  34,  35,     36 

Dental  experts,  testimony  of,  in  civil  arjd  criminal  cases 17 

the  field  for §  8,     17 

Dental  expert  witness,  definition  of 12,     13 

knowledge  required  of 14,     15 

opinion  of 16,     17 

scope  of  knowledge  of 16 

Dental  j  urisprudence,  definition  of 9 

field  of 9 

Dental  jurists,  Dr.  Elwell  on 9,     10 

requirements  of 9 

Dental  jury,  decision  of 16,     17 

Dental  laws,  constitutionality  of 1 27 

constitutionality  of,  denied 1 24,  1 27 

"  Minnesota 128 

"  New  Jersey 128 

decision  in  courts  with  reference  to  legality  of 127 

quotation  of  the  case  of  Minnesota  State  v.  Vandersluis,  opinion  as 

rendered 128-134 

quotation  of  the  case  of  Wilkins  v.  State  of  Indiana, 134-140 

.regulating  the  practice  of  dentistry  : 

UNITED   STATES. 

Alabama 210-216 

Arkansas 216-218 

California 218-221 

Colorado 221-224 

(  onnecticut 224,  225 

1  Delaware 225-227 


460  INDEX. 

Florida 227,  228 

Georgia 228-232 

Illinois 232-235 

Indiana 236-239 

[owa 239-242 

Kansas 242-244 

Kentucky 24"),  24<i 

Louisiana 247,  248 

Maine 249-251 

Maryland 251-254 

Massachusetts 254-257 

Michigan 257-260 

Minnesota 2(51-270 

Mississippi 270-273 

Missouri 273-275 

Nebraska 275,  27<i 

New  Hampshire 277-280 

New  Jersey 280-291 

New  York 291-299 

North  Carolina 299-301 

North  Dakota 302-307 

Ohio 308,  309 

Oklahoma 309-312 

Pennsylvania 312-316 

Khode  Island 316,  317 

South  Carolina 317-320 

Tennessee 320-323 

Texas 323-325 

Vermont 326,  327 

Virginia 328-330 

Washington  Territory 330-334 

West  Virginia 334,  335 

Wisconsin 336-338 

FOREIGN. 

Austria-Hungary , ,    339 

Belgium 339,  340 

Brazil 340 

Cuba 341,  342 

Denmark  and  Danish  Provinces 342,  343 

France 344-347 

Germany 348-350 

Great  Britain  and  British  Possessions 351-448 

England 351-370 

New  Zealand 370-377 

Victoria 378-387 

Dominion  of  Canada 387-448 

Northwest  Territories 387-389 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  461 

British  Columbia 389-392 

Manitoba 392-399 

New  Brunswick 399-408 

Nova  Scotia 408-419 

Outario 419-425 

Prince  Edward  Island 425-427 

Quebec 427-448 

Holland 448-450 

Italy 451 

Mexico 452 

Russia 452-455 

Spain • 456 

Dental  legislation,  history  of 205-209 

the  first  States  to  secure 208,  209 

Dental  malpractice,  definition  of  Ignorant 37 

"  "  Negligent 37 

"  "  Willful 37 

Dental  operations,  classification  of 145 

definition  of  Surgical 145,  14(3 

illustrations  of - 146 

definition  of  Surgical-Mechanical 146 

illustrations  of 146 

definition  of  Mechanical 146 

illustrations  of 146 

legal  definition  of 145 

Dental  patents,  action  of  Central  Dental  Association  of  Northern  New  Jer- 

144 
sey  on -LT* 

an  act  to  prevent  the  granting  of,  promulgated  by 145 

dental  operations  and  processes  the  subject  of,  alone  reviewed 144 

jurisprudence  of,  applicable  to  dentistry 144 

limitations  of 144 

Dental  Protective  Association  U.  S.  A.,  case  of  White  et  al  v.  Lee,  202,  203,  204 

important  legal  proposition  with  reference  to 202,  203 

object  of . 201,202 

suits  contested  by • 202 

Dental  sciences,  as  applied  to  the  law 9 

Dental  vulcanite,  Cummings'  patent  for 188 

Goodyear  patent  for 18$,  189 

Simpson  patent  for 1"^ 

Dental  Vulcanite  Co.  v.  Smith  et  al 188 

action  on  appeal  to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 189,  190 

Dental  witnesses,  contempt  of  court  by 12 

various  classes  of ^" 

I  xntist  and  bis  assistant,  legal  relation  of 119 

governed  by  law  of  master  and  man 119 

Dentistry,  charter  of  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons,  of  England,  to  ex- 
amine' candidates  for  the  practice  of 206,  207 


462  INDEX. 

Dr.  James  Smith  on 206 

early  existence  of,  in  America 2<>7,  208 

"     period  of 205 

limitations  of  the  practice  of 33 

period  of  progress  of,  in  1840 209 

progress  of 34 

Dentists,  duties  of :::; 

Dentists'  Act,  passed  in  the  United  Kingdoms  in  1878 207 

amendment  of  the  law  relating  to 207 

Diploma,  difficulties  attending  prosecution  for  practicing  without,   and 

cases  thereof  cited 142,  1 43 

in  various  States,  quoted* 141,  142 

liability  for  practicing  without ' 141 

Erroneous  assertion  by  a  dentist 33,  34 

Error  of  judgment,  dentist  not  liable  for,  when  reasonable  doubts  exist.48,  49 

quotation  of  decision  in  Boyle  v. Winslow 47,  48 

"                    "        "  Leighton  v.  Sargeant 48 

"                    "         "  Percy  v.  Millardon 48 

Etherization,  capability  of  remembrance  of  occurrences,  and  possibility 

of  resistance  during  the  period  of 93,  94,  95 

consciousness  of  pain,  with  inability  to  resist,  improbable  in 96 

illusion  during 94 

illustrations  of 94,  95 

muscular  movement  not  entirely  abolished  in 95,  96 

summary  of  action  of,  on  will  power  and  muscular  movements 96,  97 

the  characteristics  of  the  recovery  from 93,  94 

various  periods  and  characteristics  of 93 

will  power  over  muscular  movement  not  abolished  in 95 

Experimentation  with  patents 34,  43,  44 

the  case  of  Slater  v.  Baker 43 

with  new  instruments 43 

"     patents,  dentists  liable  for 43 

Expert  and  common  witnesses,  distinction  between 15,  ]  6,  17 

Expert  witness,  compensation  of 11,  15 

dental 12,  13 

Greenleaf  on 12,  13 

inquiry  of  the  court  as  to  qualification  of. 14 

observation  of  Mr.  Smith  on 13 

requirements  of . , 13 

qualification  required  of \  6,  13, 14,  IS 

Extraction  of  teeth,  citation  of  a  death  from 82 

hemorrhage  from 83 

the  case  of  Shaw  v.  Evans  quoted 82,  83,  84,  85 

Fees,  limitation  of  amount  of,  recoverable 106 

not  recoverable,  when  no  benefit  is  derived 105 

regulated  by  circumstances,  difficulties,  and  responsibilities 107 

the  amount  of,  legally  recoverable 1(»5 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  463 

when  excessive  and  unjust,  reduced  by  the  jury 106 

when  increased  by  error  of  dentist,  the  additional  amount  not  recov- 
erable    lo© 

Fracture  of  the  jaws,  compromise  of  suits  for,  by  dentists 6-i 

legal  inquiries  as  to  the  extent  and  character  of 60,  61 

opinion  of  the  author  of  the  responsibility  of  the  dentist  in 62 

particulars  of  the  case  of  Dr.  Westby 62 

the  case  of  Dr.  B.  F.  Williams 1 63 

"         "      Joice  v.  Howland  and  Mason 63 

"         "      Messrs.  Gabriel 63 

"         "      Brooks  v.  Todd 64 

plaintiff  must  prove  defendant  the  causal  of 60 

"  "        "      existence  of 60 

sometimes  accidental 61 

Fractures,  sometimes  due  to  natural  and  unforeseen  causes 61 

two  teeth  attached  to  one  another  may  cause 61,  62 

Goodyear,  Nelson,  patent  of 188 

vulcanite  patents,  a  history  of  the  litigations  for  the  infringement  and 

use  of,  without  a  license 187,  188 

vulcanite  patents,  suits  for  the  infringement  of 188,  189 

Identification,  by  means  of  teeth 17,     :J2 

difficulties  attending 1 9 

means  available  for  positive 19 

of  criminals 18 

"  murderers 18 

"  corpse 18 

"  the  body  of  Dr.  Cronin 18 

"  Tascott 18 

the  case  of  Caroline  Walsh 20,     21 

"  "     Goss-Udderzook 23,     33 

"  "     Madame  Menetrel 22 

"  "     Marchioness  of  Salisbury 10 

"  "     Sir  Peter  Halkett 19,     20 

"     Timothy  Monroe 21,     22 

"  "     Webster  Parkman 22,     23 

"    case  reported  by  Dr.  Guy 10 

Injunction,  granted  by  courts  of  equity  to  restrain  infringement 158 

Injuries,  evidence  submitted  to  prove 38 

legal  inquiry  in  proving 38,     39 

resulting  from  want  of  care  and  diligence 491 

the  plaintiff  must  prove  that  he  suffered 38 

Internal  medication,  legal  right  of  dentists  to  treat  cases  by 3ft 

knowledge  of,  required  of  dentists 36,     37 

International  Tooth-Crown  Company  v.  Richmond,  el  al ,  decision  in  the 

case  of 164,  176 

appeal  of  the  case  of 176,  177 

history  of  the  litigation  of  the  case  of 176. 


404  INDEX. 

the  action  of  Supreme  Court,  U.  S.  A.,  in  the  appeal  of. 177 

Intel  national  Tooth- Crown  Company,  interpretation  of  decision  in  the  suits 

of,  by  Messrs.  <  tordon  and  Beach 182,  183 

Invention,  accidental  production  of. 196 

crude  and  imperfect  experiments  do  not  entitle  to 193 

he  who  invents  first  will  have  prior  right  to 193 

Henry  Ilowson  on 192 

mechanical  advice  does  not  give  the  right  to 197 

mere  substitution  of  material  does  not  give  the  right  to 194,  195 

on  experimentation  of. 1 92 

requirements  to  constitute 193 

who  may  be  considered  as  having  the  prior  right  to 192 

Inventor,  reasonable  diligence  in  perfecting  invention  necessary  to  preserve 

rights  of, 195 

Inventor,  requirements  of 192 

who  may  be  considered  as  the  first 192,  193 

Malpractice.     Fracture  of  the  jaws,  during  extraction  of  teeth,  civil  suits 

for 60,  61 

definition  of  dental 37 

"         "  ignorant 37 

"         "negligent 37 

"         "  willful 37 

may  give  rise  to  criminal  and  civil  prosecutions 37 

New  York  penal  code  of 38 

the  various  forms  of  civil  suits  for  dental 38 

proof  of  injury  necessary  in  cases  of. 38,  39 

various  kinds  of 37 

Married  women,  in  suits  against,  husband  must  be  joined  in  the  suit 108 

liable  for  services  on  express  promise  binding  her  separate  estates. . .  108 

not  liable  for  service,  unless  under  a  personal  contract 108 

Minors,  according  to  statutes,  under  age  of  twenty-one  years 109 

circumstances  alter  the  general  rule  of  liability  of 109 

liability  of  infant  for  dental  services 109 

not  liable  for  services  contracted  for 109 

Negligence,  damages  for,  may  be  recovered  by  heirs 51 

damage  suits  for,  the  case  of  Grove  v.  Stewart  and  Sharp 51 

"          "          "            "      Keily  v.  Colton 51 

"      Koskey  v.  P.  &  T.  Tunstall 51,  52 

"  "  "      Matthews  r.  Conrad 52-56 

definition  of  Slight 49 

"         "  Ordinary 49 

"         "  Gross 49 

gratuitous  service,  no  defense  of 51 

plaintiff  must  prove 50 

production  of  evidence  to  prove 50 

rebuttal  evidence  in 50 

three  degrees  of. 49 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  465 

where  cause  of  has  been  mutual 51 

^New  operations,  liability  of  dentist  performing 34,     35 

the  practice  of,  by  dentists 43,     44 

Nitrous  oxide  gas,  administration  of,  when  known  to  be  dangerous 80,     81 

citation  of  the  case  of  Gramme  v.  Boerer 81 

comparative  safety  of  . . . <  5  -  80 

examination  of  the  patient  before  the  administration  of 80 

history  of  the  deaths  following  the  inhalation  of 77 

injuries  to  health  from 76,     77 

report  of  cases  of  death  from 77,  78,  79,     80 

responsibilities  assumed  by  dentist  under  such  circumstances 81 

the  case  of  M.  Duchesne,  note  on,  by  author 80 

Ordinary  skill,  dentist  must  use 49 

legal  interpretation  of ■*" 

Ordinary  skill,  proof  of  possession  established  by  evidence 44 

the  opinion  of  the  court  in  McCandless  v.  McWha 42,     43 

the  standard  of 42 

want  of,  decision  by  the  jury 44,     50 

Partnership,  dissolution  of Ill;  114 

payment  of  debts  of H4 

the  formation  of m 

the  period  of  existence  of 114 

the  right  to  use  the  firm  name  after  dissolution  of  (case  of  Morgan  v. 

Schuyler) m»  112 

Partners,  mutual  duties  of Hl>  H4 

Patentable  combination,  may  consist  of  parts  new  and  old 192 

Patent  rights 144>  204 

abandoned  application  for 195,  196 

action  at  law  for  infringement  of,  in  what  court  brought 199 

damages  recoverable  for  the  infringement  of 199,  200 

defense  to  action  for  infringement  of 200,  201 

"        "  the  infringement  of 198,  19 J 

definition  of  a  claim  in 19^ 

dentistry,  with  reference  to 191 

devices  need  not  be  similar  to  constitute  infringement  of. 197 

different  modes  of  operation,  and  an  improved  result,  by  substitution 

of  one  device  for  another,  gives  the  right  to 190 

for  composition  of  matter 1^ 

granted  for  useful  inventions 191 

infringement  of,  by  making,  using  or  selling. 196 

"  "  not  avoided  by  addition  of  new  elements 197 

"  "  the  unauthorized  use  of 196 

legality  of 19° 

may  be  obtained  by  alien 190 

jiot  necessary  that  the  invention  be  perfect  beyond  improvement  to 

entitle  to 194 

patentee  of  improvement  on  must  obtain  license  of  prior  patentee 196 


466  INDEX. 

proof  of  the  right  to 190 

purpose  of  granting  190 

reason  of  indiscriminate  grant  of,  in  dentistry 190,   191 

rebuttal  evidence  to  prove  prior  right  to 194 

renewal  of  application  for,  when  refused 195 

requirements  necessary  to  prove  invention  and  the  right  to 191 

special  considerations  in  dentistry,  with  reference  to 191 

substitution  of  chemical  equivalents  are  an  infringement  of 198 

the  use  of  an  old  process,  with  no  change  in  manner  of  application, 

will  not  sustain  the  right  to 198 

to  whom  is  granted 190 

use  of,  after  an  injunction  granted,  constitutes  contempt  of  court 200 

"     "   process  by  defendant  before  issue  of  court,  will  not  restrain  him 

from  continuing  its  use 197 

Patent  rights,  when  all  parts,  except  one,  were  old,  not  using  excepted  part, 

escapes  infringement  of 1 98 

when  it  gives  a  monopoly  of  the  use  of  a  well-known  substance,  in  a 

well-known  form,  cannot  be  secured   198 

Patentees,  list  of  tooth-crown 1 63 

Patents  issued  for  operations  in  dentistry 146,  163,  183,  186 

Surgical  dental  operations 146,  147,  148 

Bigelow,   E.  A.,  granted  to 147 

Bonwill,  W.  G.  A.,         "        147,148 

Bruff,  Thomas,  "         147 

Hayden,  H.  H.,  "         147 

Eichmond,  C.  M.,  "         146,147 

the  invalidity  of  Richmond  patent 147 

Surgical  mechanical  dental  operations 148,  163 

methods  of  filling  and  restoring  decayed  teeth  : 

Dartt,  W.  A.  granted  to 148,  149 

Land,  C.  H.,  "        149,  150 

Land,  C.  H.,  "         150 

Land,C.H.,  " 150 

Land.C.H.,  "        151,152 

Land,  C.  H.,  "         152 

Robinson,  A,         "         149 

Taylor,  E.  C,         "         148 

devices  for  retaining   fillings  in  teeth  and  metal  cap-coverings  for 
fillings : 

Osmond,  E.,  granted  to 152 

Noble,  R.,  "  • 152 

Weston,  H.,  "  152,  153 

methods  of  fastening  tooth-crowns  in  prepared  roots : 

Sheffield,  L.  T.,  granted  to 153 

bridge  dentures — permanent: 

Beale,  S.  T.,  Jr.,  granted  to 157,  158 

Clowes,  J.  W.,  "        156,  157 


DENTAL    JURISPRUDENCE.  467 

Grout,  C.  P.,  granted  to 156 

Grout,  C.  P.,  "         • 155 

Low.J.E.,  "         153,154 

Low,  J.E.,  " 154 

Sheffield,  L.  T.,     "        153 

Sheffield,  L.  T.,     "         155 

Sheffield,  W.  S.,    "         156 

bridge  dentures — removable : 

Brown,  G.  V.  I.,  granted  to 160 

Curtis,  G.  L.,  «'         159 

Palmer,  P.  A.,  "         160 

Kichmond,  C.  M.,        "         159 

Throckmorton,  J.  A.,"         158 

Throckmorton,  J.  A.,  "         158 

Mechanical  dental  operations : 

Bemis,  M.,  granted  to 184 

Cool,  G.  W.,        "         184 

Daly,  J.  A.,         "        186 

Diefenbach,  Geo.,  granted  to 184 

Folsom,  N.  T.,  "         185 

Gillespie,  J.  P.,  "         185 

McClelland,  J.  A.,        " 184 

McClelland,  J.  A.,         "        184 

Merrick,  E.  J.,  «         184 

Miller,  W.H.,  "         185 

Phillips,T.,  "        186 

Puroine  (S.  T.)  &  Smith  (H.),  granted  to 186 

Starr,  E.  T.,  granted  to 186 

Stedman,  J.  J.,      "         185 

Twitchell,  H.,       "         185 

Wilkerson,  B.,       "        186 

Penal  statutes,  provisions  of > 38 

"  "  "  "in  New  York 38 

Professional  men,  not  warrantors  of  their  work 102,  103 

services,  dentists  can  not  be  compelled  to  render 99 

the  nature  of 99 

Prosecutions,  criminal  and  civil 37,     38 

Piape,  accusation  of  a  dentist  of  committing,  on  a  female  under  anaesthesia, 

87,88,    89 

a  dentist  in  Brandenburg,  Prussia,  indicted  for 97 

"  "   Montreal  "  " 97 

cases  recorded  where  the  woman  believes,  was  committed  on  her  ....     88 

defloration  of  plaintiff  seldom  established  in  prosecutions  for 98 

dentists  exposed  to  accusation  of  committing 88 

Jas.  T.  Grant,  charged  at  the  Jersey  (Channel  Isles)  with   commit- 
ting  97,     98 

report  of  the  prosecution  of  Dr.  Beale  on  the  charge  of. .  .89,  90,  91,     92 


468  INDEX. 

remarks  on    92 

Services,  claims  for,  must  be  proven 110 

Skill,  degree  of,  required  of  a  dentist  by  law 39,  40,  41,  42 

the  general  rule  of,  as  stated 40 

liability  for  the  want  of 41 

the  amount  of,  required  of  a  dentist 31 

the  degree  required,  as  stated  in  Simonds  v.  Henry 41,  42 

the  highest  degree  of,  not  required  of  a  dentist 41 

Wilcox,  on  the  want  of 40,  41 

Specialists  and  non-specialists,  the  relative  skill  and  knowledge  of. 47 

liability  for  lack  of  special  skill 47 

the  degree  of  skill  expected  by  patients 47 

<:         "  "         required  by  law 47 

Standard  of  skill,  more  strict  where  life  is  endangered 46 

Standard  of  skill,  case  of  Small  r.  Howard 45 

"      Mailer  v.  Boynton 46 

illustration  thereof,  case  of  Keily  v.  Colton 46 

required  of  country  dentists  in  comparison  with  those  of  practicing  in 

cities  and  large  towns  44,  45 

varies  according  to  circumstances  and  localities 44,  45,  46 

"  "  "  the  condition  of  the  patient 46 

State  Board  of  Examiners,  authority  and  legality  of 124 

opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  Dent  v.  State  of  West  Virginia,  in 

dispute  of  legality  of 124,  125 

the  opinion  of  Judge  McGary,  with  reference  to  legality  of 125 

the  quotation  of  decision  in  Wilkins  v.  State  of  Indiana 125,   126 

Student  or  other  person  can  perform  the  mechanical  operations  in  the  lab- 
oratory without  legal  requirements 120 

Subpoena 10,  12 

must  expert  witness  obey  service  of 11,  12,  15 

service  of,  requires  attendance  in  court  of  ordinary  witnesses 10,   11 

Third  party,  liability  of,  when  services  are  requested  for  another 107 

not  liable  for  the  same  unless  relationship  exists 107,  108 

Tooth-Crowns,  a  chart  of,  patented 161,  162 

an  interpretation  of  patents  on 186,  187 

a  patent  by  John  B.  Beers  on 186,  187 

expiration  of  Beers'  -patent  on 187 

with  pivots ' 161 

without  pivots 162 

Treatments,  dentist's  right  to  use  his  own  judgment  in 105 

Unclean  instruments,  citation  of  cases  of,  reported  by  Drs.  L.  D.  Buckley, 

C.  W.  Dulles,  F.  M.  Otis,  Lancereaux,  etc 85,    86 

innoculation  of  patients  from 86,  86,     87 

dentists  unjustly  accused  of 86,     87 

disinfection  of,  necessary 87 

general  rule  as  stated 87 

the  use  of,  by  a  certain  class  of  dentists 87 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

This  book  is  due  on  the  date  indicated  below,  or  at  the 
expiration  of  a  definite  period  after  the  date  of  borrowing, 
as  provided  by  the  rules  of  the  Library  or  by  special  ar- 
rangement with  the  Librarian  in  charge. 


^>WAw      M 


RK751 
Rehfus: 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES  (hsl.stx) 

RK  751  R26  C.2 

A  treatise  on  dental  lunsDrudence  for  d 


%■ 


M~ 


jUuy 


